Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report
Final Report Prepared by LUC and Cuesta Consulting Ltd March 2017
Project Title: Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Review
Client: Hertfordshire County Council
Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by
1 09/08/2016 Initial Draft Report for Jonny Hill Taran Taran client review (excludes Livingston Livingston MSA/MCAs and resource assessment)
2 22/12/2016 Full Draft Report Jonny Hill, Taran Taran Josh Allen, Livingston Livingston Calum McCulloch, Alan Thompson
3 24/02/2017 Final Draft Report Josh Allen, Taran Taran Sarah Smith, Livingston Livingston Taran Livingston
4 17/03/2017 Final Report Josh Allen Josh Allen Jon Grantham
6315_Site_Assessment_Report_3.docm Last saved: 05/04/2017 12:17
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report
Final Draft Report Prepared by LUC and Cuesta Consulting Ltd March 2017
Planning & EIA LUC LONDON Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 43 Chalton Street Bristol Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning London Glasgow Registered Office: Landscape Management NW1 1JD Edinburgh 43 Chalton Street Ecology T +44 (0)20 7383 5784 London NW1 1JD Mapping & Visualisation [email protected] FS 566056 EMS 566057 LUC uses 100% recycled paper
Contents
Glossary of Abbreviations 1
1 Introduction 2 Background 2 Report Structure 2
2 Policy Requirements 3 National Policy and Guidance 3 Local Policy 6
3 Site Selection Methodology for Sand and Gravel 7 Purpose 7 Approach 7 Sustainability Appraisal 8 Habitats Regulations Assessment 8 Site Selection Methodology for Sand and Gravel 8 Sieve 1 – Resource Assessment – Major Constraints 9 Sieve 2 – Resource Assessment 9 Sieve 3 – Detailed Site Assessments 10
4 Site Selection Methodology for Brick Clay 30
5 Mineral Safeguarding 31 Methodology 32 Proposed MSAs and MCAs 33
6 Site and Preferred Area Assessment Findings 34 Sieve 1 – Major Constraints 39 Sieve 2 – Resource Assessment 39 Sieve 3 – Detailed Site Assessments 40
7 Conclusions 72 Sand and gravel site options 72
Appendix 1 76 Site and Preferred Area Proforma 76
Appendix 2 206 Hertfordshire Highways Department assessment of site options 206
Tables Table 2.1: Sand and Gravel Apportionment Levels from the 2015 Hertfordshire LAA 6 Table 3.1: Evaluation Framework for Sieve 3 14 Table 6.1: List of Sites put forward through the Call for Sites 38 Table 6.2 : Summary of the suitability of each of the sand and gravel sites and preferred areas against detailed site assessment criteria 43 Table 6.3: Summary of the suitability of each of the brick clay sites against detailed site assessment criteria 44 Table 6.4: Summary of the potential effects of the sand and gravel sites 45 Table 6.5: Summary of the potential effects of the brick clay sites 65 Table 6.6: Proposed sites and preferred areas ranked in terms of their potential impact on the site and surrounding environment 70
Figures Figure 5.1: Sand & Gravel Resources in Hertfordshire 34 Figure 5.2: Proposed Mineral Safeguarding Areas for Sand & Gravel Resources in Hertfordshire 35 Figure 5.3: Brick Clay Resources in Hertfordshire 36 Figure 5.4: Proposed Mineral Safeguarding Areas for Brick Clay Resources in Hertfordshire 37 Figure 6.1: Location of Sites in County Context 41 Figure 6.2: Location of Sites 42 Figure 7.1: Site ranking based on the range and severity of likely adverse effects generated by each site 75
Glossary of Abbreviations
Definition
AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
BGS British Geological Survey
BMV Best and Most Versatile
HCC Hertfordshire County Council
HRA Habitats Regulations Assessment
IMAU Industrial Minerals Assessment Unit
LAA Local Aggregates Assessment
NNR National Nature Reserve
NPPF National Planning Policy Framework
MCA Minerals Consultation Area
MLP Minerals Local Plan
MPA Minerals Planning Authority
MSA Minerals Safeguarding Area
PPG Planning Practice Guidance
SA Sustainability Appraisal
SAC Special Area of Conservation
SPA Special Protection Area
SPD Supplementary Planning Document
SPZ Source Protection Zone
SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 1 March 2017
1 Introduction
Background
1.1 Hertfordshire County Council (HCC), as the Minerals Planning Authority, is reviewing the existing Minerals Local Plan (adopted in 2007) to ensure that it is up-to-date and provides a reliable plan for at least a further 15 year plan period, plus an additional seven years for sand and gravel1. The content of a Minerals Local Plan must meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and have regard to the content of the online national Planning Policy Guidance (PPG); both of which are discussed further in Section 2 below. One of the key aspects of a Minerals Local Plan is to plan for a steady and adequate supply of aggregates by identifying specific sites, preferred areas and/or areas of search.
1.2 LUC and Cuesta Consulting were appointed in December 2014 by HCC to review the Council’s previous mineral site selection methodology (developed in 2009), amend and update it where required, and then apply the methodology to identify suitable sites for the extraction of sand and gravel and brick clay in the county. In addition, a methodology for the identification of Minerals Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) and Minerals Consultation Areas (MCAs), and its subsequent implementation was required.
1.3 The conclusions and recommendations of this report will inform the emerging Minerals Local Plan (MLP), forming a key piece of its evidence base.
Report Structure
1.4 This report includes a thorough review of national policy and guidance, together with national and local information which has informed the analysis and approach undertaken. It was critical that the site selection methodology meets the statutory local plan requirements: to be positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy and guidance.
1.5 The remainder of this report is structured as follows: • Chapter 2: National and local policy requirements relating to selecting sites for inclusion in MLPs and identifying MSAs and MCAs.
• Chapter 3: Describes the site selection methodology for sand and gravel and brick clay. • Chapter 4: Describes the approach to brick clay. • Chapter 5: Describes the methodology for defining MSAs and MCAs and presents the proposed MSAs/MCAs.
• Chapter 6: Sets out the findings of the sand and gravel and brick clay site and preferred area assessments.
• Chapter 7: Study conclusions. 1.6 In addition, the Report contains two appendices: • Appendix 1: Completed Site Assessment Proforma. • Appendix 2: Hertfordshire Highways Department assessment of site options.
1 This is to ensure that the required landbank for sand and gravel can be met. As such, the total period for sand and gravel is 22 years.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 2 March 2017
2 Policy Requirements
National Policy and Guidance
2.1 Minerals are essential to support economic growth and our quality of life. Paragraph 142 of the NPPF2 states that it is important that there is a sufficient supply of material to provide the infrastructure, buildings, energy and goods that the country needs, and emphasises that minerals can only be worked where they are found and it is important to make best use of them to secure their long-term conservation. This highlights the importance of the need to facilitate a steady and adequate supply of minerals, as required by the NPPF. Therefore a positively prepared, justified, effective approach to the site selection methodology and site selection study, which is consistent with national policy and guidance, is essential.
Site Selection for Aggregates
2.2 The NPPF states in paragraph 145 that Minerals Planning Authorities (MPAs) should plan for a steady and adequate supply of aggregates by: • “…making provision for the land-won and other elements of their Local Aggregate Assessment in their mineral plans taking account of the advice of the Aggregate Working Parties and the National Aggregate Co-ordinating Group as appropriate. Such provision should take the form of specific sites, preferred areas and/or areas of search and locational criteria as appropriate; • …making provision for the maintenance of landbanks of at least 7 years for sand and gravel and at least 10 years for crushed rock, whilst ensuring that the capacity of operations to supply a wide range of materials is not compromised…;”
2.3 The online National Planning Practice Guidance3 (PPG) elaborates on the policies included in the NPPF, stating in paragraph 008 that MPAs should “plan for the steady and adequate supply of minerals in one or more of the following ways (in order of priority): • designating Specific Sites – where viable resources are known to exist, landowners are supportive of minerals development and the proposal is likely to be acceptable in planning terms. Such sites may also include essential operations associated with mineral extraction; • designating Preferred Areas, which are areas of known resources where planning permission might reasonably be anticipated. Such areas may also include essential operations associated with mineral extraction; and/or • designating Areas of Search – areas where knowledge of mineral resources may be less certain but within which planning permission may be granted, particularly if there is a potential shortfall in supply”.
2.4 In exceptional circumstances, such as where a MPA is largely made up of designated areas protection areas such as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), it may be appropriate to rely largely on policies which set out the general conditions against which applications will be assessed. However, it should be noted that HCC is not largely made up of designated sites/areas, and the main resource in the County, sand and gravel, is located outside the Chilterns AONB.
2.5 It is essential that when undertaking site selection that accurate and high quality data is used, as paragraph 009 of the PPG states that the better the quality of data available to MPAs, the better the prospect of a site being designated as a Specific Site. Designating Specific Sites in minerals plans provides the necessary certainty on when and where development may take place.
2.6 It must be borne in mind that under certain circumstances it may be preferable to focus on extensions to existing sites rather than plan for new sites. For example, it is likely that due to
2 National Planning Policy Framework. CLG, 2012. 3 Retrieved on 25th July 2016 from: http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 3 March 2017 plant and infrastructure already being in place, an extension to an existing mineral site may, in some cases, be able to work resources that would not otherwise be commercially viable, if worked in isolation as a new site. However, paragraph 010 of the PPG states that the suitability of each proposed site, whether an extension to an existing site or a new site, must be considered on its individual merits, taking into account issues such as:
• need for the specific mineral; • economic considerations (such as being able to continue to extract the resource, retaining jobs, being able to utilise existing plant and other infrastructure);
• positive and negative environmental impacts (including the feasibility of a strategic approach to restoration; for example the use of ecosystem services and landscape-scale restoration opportunities to guide the location of future minerals extraction such that it optimises the generation of long-term environmental benefits); and
• the cumulative impact of proposals in an area.
Industrial Minerals
2.7 Industrial minerals are accounted for separately in the NPPF and PPG due to differences in the ways in which they are worked, the wide range of uses they have and the range of markets they supply. As a result, paragraph 086 of the PPG states that MPAs should recognise that there are marked differences in geology, physical and chemical properties, markets and supply and demand between different industrial minerals, which can have different implications for their extraction. The differences of particular relevance to brick clay, and which therefore need to be taken account of in the site selection methodology, include:
• geology influencing the size of the mineral resource, how it may be extracted and the amount of mineral waste generated;
• the fact that markets are based on the consistent physical properties of the products (bricks, in this case); and
• the potential for the quality of clay extracted from a single site varying considerably within the site. This may require multiple extraction faces within one quarry and blending to produce a consistent end-product.
Environmental Considerations
2.8 Environmental impacts from both aggregate and industrial mineral extraction require assessment. Significant environmental impacts are best addressed through consideration of an Environmental Impact Assessment which accompanies planning applications for most new mineral workings. However, when undertaking site selection as part of minerals plan preparation, MPAs need to consider planning and environmental constraints and site specific details for similar issues, albeit it in a different level of detail. Paragraph 013 of the PPG states that the principal issues that MPAs should address, bearing in mind that not all issues will be relevant at every site to the same degree, and not all issues can be addressed at the plan preparation stage, include:
• noise associated with the operation • dust; • air quality; • lighting; • visual impact on the local and wider landscape; • landscape character; • archaeological and heritage features; • traffic; • risk of contamination to land; • soil resources;
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 4 March 2017
• geological structure; • impact on best and most versatile agricultural land; • blast vibration; • flood risk; • land stability/subsidence; • internationally, nationally or locally designated wildlife sites, protected habitats and species, and ecological networks;
• impacts on nationally protected landscapes (National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty);
• nationally protected geological and geomorphological sites and features; • site restoration and aftercare; • surface and, in some cases, ground water issues; and • water abstraction. 2.9 Not all of the issues listed above will be relevant to all sites, and not all of them will be able to be addressed properly at the site selection stage, but this list provides a useful starting point for issues to be considered.
2.10 Policy such as paragraph 90 of the NPPF also needs to be taken into account when considering planning and environmental constraints. Paragraph 90 outlines how mineral extraction is not an inappropriate form of development in the Green Belt provided it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belt. The purposes of Green Belt are:
• to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; • to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; • to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; • to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and • to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
Mineral Safeguarding
2.11 Paragraph 143 of the NPPF sets out the requirement for MPAs to ensure that their Local Plans define Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) and adopt appropriate policies in order that known locations of specific minerals resources are not needlessly sterilised by non-mineral development, whilst not creating a presumption that resources defined will be worked. Mineral Consultation Areas (MCAs) should then be defined based on the MSAs. In addition to mineral resources, Local Plans should safeguard existing, planned and potential facilities for the bulk transport of minerals by rail, sea and inland waterways; and set out policies to encourage the prior extraction of minerals, where practicable and environmentally feasible, if it is necessary for non-mineral development to take place. In the case of Hertfordshire, this means that existing and disused railheads, such as the five rail depots which transport mineral throughout the county and beyond, should be safeguarded.
2.12 The PPG and the British Geological Survey report ’Mineral safeguarding in England: good practice advice’4 provides guidance on minerals safeguarding, including the steps MPAs should take to safeguard mineral resources, and what the role is of the district council, as the local planning authority, in safeguarding minerals.
2.13 The PPG states that MPAs should adopt a systematic approach for safeguarding mineral resources, which:
4 British Geological Survey (BGS) report ‘Mineral safeguarding in England: good practice advice’ (Wrighton et. al., 2011)
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 5 March 2017
• uses the best available information on the location of all mineral resources in the authority area. This may include use of British Geological Survey maps as well as industry sources;
• consults with the minerals industry, other local authorities (especially district authorities in two-tier areas), local communities and other relevant interested parties to define Minerals Safeguarding Areas;
• sets out Minerals Safeguarding Areas on the policies map that accompanies the local plan and defines Mineral Consultation Areas; and
• adopts clear development management policies. 2.14 The PPG (paragraph 005) also outlines the important role district councils have in safeguarding minerals, for example, having regard to the minerals local plan when identifying suitable areas for non-mineral development in their local plans, and showing MSAs on their policy maps.
Local Policy
2.15 In accordance with paragraph 145 of the NPPF, MPAs should plan for a steady and adequate supply of aggregates by preparing an annual Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA), either individually or jointly by agreement with another or other MPAs, based on a rolling average of 10 years sales data and other relevant local information, and an assessment of all supply options (including marine-dredged, secondary and recycled sources).
2.16 Paragraph 061 of the PPG defines the LAA as “an annual assessment of the demand for and supply of aggregates in a MPAs area”. The purpose of the LAA is to assess the current local mineral provision against the requirements detailed in the NPPF and PPG, including the Government’s Guidance on the Managed Aggregate Supply System.
2.17 Hertfordshire County Council published its most recent LAA in 20155. The LAA states that the county council will seek to plan for the agreed East of England Aggregates Working Party sub- regional apportionment level for sand and gravel (1.39 million tonnes per annum (mtpa)) to provide for flexibility to maintain supply when the economy recovers. This will ensure that an adequate and steady supply of aggregate is achieved over the longer term.
2.18 Chapter 7 of the 2015 Hertfordshire LAA states that using the East of England Aggregates Working Party sub-regional apportionment of 1.39 mtpa, the county does not have sufficient permitted reserves to fulfil the requirement for a 15 year Minerals Local Plan period (the same would be true if the alternative approaches of using the 10 year rolling average sales or the 3 year average sales figures were to be followed). As a result, HCC are seeking to address the identified shortfall in permitted reserves by allocating sufficient land in the review of the Minerals Local Plan. This site selection methodology report and the subsequent site selection study aim to support this process.
Table 2.1: Sand and Gravel Apportionment Levels from the 2015 Hertfordshire LAA
Apportionment Level Total
East of England AWP apportionment figure 1.39 million tonnes per annum
10 year average sales figure (2005-2014) 1.13 million tonnes per annum
3 year average sales figure (2012-2014) 1.15 million tonnes per annum.
5 Retrieved on 9th August 2016 from: http://www.hertsdirect.org/services/envplan/plan/hccdevplan/mlp/locaggassmt/
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 6 March 2017
3 Site Selection Methodology for Sand and Gravel
Purpose
3.1 The purpose of the site selection study for sand and gravel was two-fold: • The first purpose was to assess the potential sand and gravel sites put forward through the Call for Sites process. HCC undertook a Call for Sites in early 2016, the aim of which was to receive detailed site proposals from quarry operators, land owners etc. The site-specific information submitted through this process was detailed, enabling a comparative assessment of potential sites through implementation of the site selection methodology. This process identifies, where appropriate, specific sites for allocation in the Minerals Local Plan.
• The second purpose was to enable the identification of areas to be allocated as preferred areas and/or areas of search if required.
Approach
3.2 The approach to developing the site selection methodologies for sand and gravel and brick clay, and methodology for the identification of MSAs and MCAs began with a review of the Council’s existing site selection methodology in light of the current policy requirements, as summarised in Section 2. The review of policy requirements provided the background and context for developing the methodologies.
3.3 The Council’s existing site selection methodology was used to identify sand and gravel sites during development of the 2007 Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan, and was consulted upon in 2009. The comments received during that consultation, the current policy requirements, and updated background data and assumptions, were all used to inform the amended and updated draft site selection methodologies. These were prepared by LUC and Cuesta, working alongside officers at HCC.
3.4 Once drafted, the site selection methodologies for sand and gravel and brick clay, together with the methodology for the identification of MSAs and MCAs, were discussed at the Interested Parties Workshop held on 19th March 2015. The Workshop involved invited representatives of statutory and non-statutory consultees, industry and neighbouring local authorities.
3.5 The discussions that took place at the Workshop and comments made were noted and collated by HCC. Invitees were also given a two week period following the Workshop within which any additional comments could be submitted to HCC. These were reviewed and used to inform the final draft site selection methodologies for public consultation.
3.6 The final draft site selection methodologies were consulted upon as part of the initial consultation on the review of the MLP, which took place between 3rd August and 16th October 2015. Consultation responses received were analysed and used to inform the final site selection methodologies described below and in Chapters 4 and 5.
3.7 Since the initial consultation it was noted by LUC that the potential impact on airports had been omitted from the assessment criteria. Aircraft are vulnerable to birdstrikes, and 80% of all strikes occur on an aircraft’s take-off or landing phase of flight, therefore highlighting the necessity for wildlife management on and within proximity of an airfield. Many types of development can attract birds, including large-flat roofed structures, landfill sites, gravel pit restoration schemes and nature reserves. As such, it was considered necessary that this should be added to the assessment criteria.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 7 March 2017
Sustainability Appraisal
3.8 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is mandatory for Local Development Documents, including MLPs prepared by County Councils. For these documents it is also necessary to conduct an environmental assessment in accordance with the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive (European Directive 2001/42/EC). Therefore, it is a legal requirement for the emerging MLP to be subject to SA and SEA throughout its preparation.
3.9 To this end, the proposed site selection methodologies which were subject to initial consultation were reviewed against the SA framework. Further information regarding this can be found in the Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Scoping Report (May 2015). The next stage of the SA/SEA has appraised the sustainability effects of all the potential mineral site options once they have been put through Sieves 1 and 2 of the site selection methodology (see below).
Habitats Regulations Assessment
3.10 When preparing the Minerals Local Plan, Hertfordshire County Council is also required by law to carry out a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA), under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 20106. The requirement for authorities to comply with the Habitats Regulations when preparing a Local Plan is explained in the national Planning Practice Guidance.
3.11 The HRA refers to the assessment of the potential effects of a development plan on one or more European sites, including Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs). Potential SPAs (pSPAs)7, candidate SACs (cSACs)8, Sites of Community Importance (SCIs)9 and Ramsar sites should also be included in the assessment. A separate HRA Report has been prepared, which assesses the likely significant effects of the potential mineral site options on these types of nature conservation sites. None of the potential site allocations in the Minerals Local Plan are considered likely to have a significant effect on the European sites within 10km of Hertfordshire. However, the potential for in-combination effects is highlighted depending on which sites are preferred for allocation.
Site Selection Methodology for Sand and Gravel
3.12 The methodology for site selection for sand and gravel focused primarily on the identification of potential Specific Sites but also included consideration of more broadly-defined Preferred Areas and/or Areas of Search. The requirements are set out in para. 145 of the NPPF, and the terms are defined in paragraph 008 of the associated online Planning Practice Guidance.
3.13 Specific Sites were identified, initially, through a Call for Sites exercise, using a set of criteria and an associated assessment framework to narrow down alternative options, thereby identifying the most appropriate sites for allocation within the MLP. Once the specific site proposals had been received, the selection methodology consisted of three stages referred to as ‘sieves’, with the intention of sites being screened out of further detailed assessment if they did not meet the sieving criteria. However, in practice, the results of Sieve 2 and 3 were considered alongside each other when determining the potential suitability of sites. The same assessment process was applied to the existing three preferred areas10 within the adopted Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan so that the preferred areas could be compared to the sites identified through the call for sites exercise.
6 Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (SI No. 2010/490). 7 Potential SPAs are sites that have been approved by Government and are currently in the process of being classified as SPAs. 8 Candidate SACs are sites that have been submitted to the European Commission, but not yet formally adopted. 9 SCIs are sites that have been adopted by the European Commission but not yet formally designated as SACs by the Government. 10 The preferred areas represent areas of the County’s mineral reserves which are considered to have potential for defining further sand and gravel extraction sites if required.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 8 March 2017
3.14 It is important to note that at this stage the detailed site assessments undertaken for this exercise are not replacements for the assessments required as a part of any planning application for a minerals site.
3.15 The three stages in the site selection methodology were: • Sieve 1 – Major Constraints: Discounting sites and/or areas, either in part or in full, which are subject to identified major constraints.
• Sieve 2 – Resource Assessment: With regard to the identification of specific sites, this sieve involved the verification of evidence relating to commercial viability and deliverability put forward through the Call for Sites process.
• Sieve 3 – Detailed Site Assessments: Assessed the sites that passed through Sieves 1 and 2 against more detailed environmental and planning constraints.
3.16 The three sieves are further described below.
Sieve 1 – Resource Assessment – Major Constraints
3.17 Certain constraints are acknowledged as absolute constraints to future minerals working. Therefore, any areas of resource or proposed sites (from the Call for Sites process) that fell within these constraints were not taken forward to Sieve 2. Where a site or area falls partly within an absolute constraint, that proportion of the site or area was discounted. The absolute constraints are:
• Urban areas, based on the Office of National Statistics urban area dataset, which includes built up areas and built up area subdivisions11 (built-up areas (BUA) and built-up area sub- divisions (BUASD) are a new geography, created as part of the 2011 Census outputs. This data provides information on the villages, towns and cities where people live, and allows comparisons between people living in built-up areas and those living elsewhere. The definition follows a “bricks and mortar” approach, with BUAs defined as land with a minimum area of 20 hectares (200,000 square metres), while settlements within 200 metres of each other are linked).
• Sites with extant planning permission for other development (for the identification of preferred areas or areas of search, these were limited to those sites whose area is greater than 5ha due to difficulties associated with collection of data for smaller planning permissions such as house extensions etc.).
• Previously worked areas.
Sieve 2 – Resource Assessment
3.18 The purpose of Sieve 2 was to confirm the viability and deliverability of the sites put forward for consideration as Specific Sites. In line with the agreed methodology, it was assumed that sites put forward by, or with the clear involvement of, the minerals industry would be likely to be economically viable prospects. However, site-specific evidence for this was requested to be provided through the Call for Sites process to demonstrate deliverability during the Plan period. A further request for information from site promoters was made by HCC in September 2016.
3.19 Examples of the evidence required for specific sites put forward in this way included confirmation of both mineral operator and land owner willingness for mineral development to take place during the Plan period; evidence of the tonnage of reserves likely to be capable of being extracted within the Site; and confirmation that any mitigation measures needed to avoid significant adverse effects on the local environment had been taken into account by the proposer in assessing the Site’s economic viability. Information submitted for each Site on each of these issues was scrutinised methodically as part of the Sieve 2 assessment, which also included independent
11 Retrieved on 25th July 2016 from: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/beginner-s-guide/census/built-up-areas--- built-up-area-sub-divisions/index.html
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 9 March 2017
checks on the availability and characteristics of the resources likely to be present. The findings of these assessments are presented at Appendix 1.
3.20 The British Geological Survey (BGS) digital resource map for Hertfordshire was used as the starting point for the confirmation of resource availability. Before being used, the resource outlines as supplied by the BGS (Sand_and_Gravel_Superficial_v2, dated August 2016) were closely checked and updated to reflect the latest available information. This included confirmation of geological and resource information by comparison with the BGS’s earlier Industrial Mineral Assessment Unit (IMAU) reports and accompanying 1:25,000-scale resource maps and borehole logs, and with the latest available BGS superficial geology mapping.
3.21 No additional borehole information was made available by industry to identify new resource areas or to eliminate previously identified resources. Significant refinements were able to be made, however, by eliminating previously worked resource areas. This was achieved utilising two additional sources of data: HCC’s GIS outlines of worked, partly worked and operational mineral permissions; and the outlines of lakes (as shown on the latest OS topographic mapping) which were formed in parts of the Colne and Lee River valleys, as a result of former gravel extraction.
3.22 The resulting updated resource outlines, together with the underlying IMAU borehole data, were then utilised to confirm the availability of workable resources within each of the proposed allocation sites, and in each of the existing Preferred Areas. They were also used as the basis for identifying Mineral Safeguarding Areas (as explained further in Chapter 5 below).
3.23 As part of the Sieve 2 assessment, consideration was also given to the three existing Preferred Areas for future sand & gravel extraction within Hertfordshire:
• Preferred Area 1 comprises land close to the existing Hatfield Quarry. The south-western part is now a specific site proposal (Hatfield Aerodrome 5/0394-16), whilst the remaining, northern part is unworked and has not been subject to any previous applications for mineral working (as far as the GIS records show). The land is underlain by the same mineral resources as were worked in adjoining sites (i.e. Kesgrave sand & gravel beneath an overburden of glacial till) and having inspected the available resource information, including IMAU reports, with the exception of any specific site allocations, all of it justifies remaining as a Preferred Area for future working.
• Preferred Area 2 comprises two separate parcels of land, to the north and south of the existing Rickneys Quarry. The southern area is now included within a specific site proposal (Ware Park 3/0770-16), which also extends further east in places. The northern area has been subject to previous planning applications for mineral extraction dating from 1988 to 1995, all of which were withdrawn. All of the land is underlain by the same mineral resources as worked in Rickneys Quarry (i.e. Kesgrave sand & gravel overlain in part by an overburden of glacial till) and again, with the exception of any specific site allocations, all of it justifies remaining as a Preferred Area for future working.
• Preferred Area 3 comprises land to the south-east of the existing Tyttenhanger Quarry, almost all of which has now been worked, as extensions to that site. It should now be removed as a Preferred Area.
Sieve 3 – Detailed Site Assessments
3.24 The final step of the site selection methodology involved the consideration of high level designations together with more detailed local planning and environmental constraints, considerations and opportunities, and (where practicable) site specific details, including findings from the parallel Sustainability Appraisal (SA) process, Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Study and comments from HCC Highways officers.
3.25 Those sites and preferred areas that passed through Sieve 2 were assessed against these more detailed criteria and subjected to the evaluation process and scoring system outlined in Table 3.1 below. Each criterion includes an explanation of how each score was applied in order to evaluate the relative merits and constraints of the potential sites. This allowed for a more detailed comparison to be made between site options. This sieve also had the ability to reduce the size of the areas taken forward rather than discounting them completely.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 10 March 2017
3.26 The criteria included in Table 3.1 have been informed by Paragraph 013 of the PPG which outlines the principal issues that MPAs should address (as stated in Section 2), professional experience and feedback received through the Interested Parties Workshop and public consultation. Specific definitions of the term ‘proximity’ used within the scoring framework in Table 3.1 was established during implementation of the site selection methodology, using established policy, guidance and best practice distances where possible. For example, paragraph 022 of the online PPG advises local planning authorities to: “…consult the Forestry Commission about development proposals that contain or are likely to affect Ancient Semi-Natural woodlands or Plantations on Ancient Woodlands Sites (PAWS) (as defined and recorded in Natural England’s Ancient Woodland inventory), including proposals where any part of the development site is within 500 metres of an ancient semi-natural woodland or ancient replanted woodland, and where the development would involve erecting new buildings, or extending the footprint of existing buildings”.
3.27 To exclude potential sites at an earlier stage can be a difficult balancing exercise – taking account of the need for greater ‘front-loading’ of the planning process (as required by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004), without risking the challenge of judicial review. Therefore, it was prudent to limit the depth of analysis carried out during this sieve, focusing primarily on any obvious reasons for inclusion or exclusion.
3.28 It is important that this evaluation process is not seen as a means of pre-judging the outcome of subsequent planning applications. It would be wrong, for example, to exclude a proposed site simply because it overlaps a particular designation, if it was felt that the resulting impacts were capable of being adequately mitigated; or if it were considered likely that the only alternative options would be less sustainable, overall. In many cases, such issues can only be properly addressed at the planning application stage, following detailed environmental assessment (which may include Environmental Impact Assessment required by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011).
3.29 It is also important to note that few, if any, designations are an absolute obstacle to mineral extraction. For example, some of the designations considered in Sieve 3 are subject to the highest level of protection in the NPPF but, nevertheless, do not entirely exclude the possibility of mineral extraction (for example if there is an overriding need for the mineral and no reasonable alternatives, or if potential impacts can be adequately mitigated and/or if there are sufficient beneficial effects that could be achieved through appropriate restoration). However, recognising the statutory protection afforded to national and international designations is important, therefore these criteria include a ‘dark red’ category.
3.30 A number of potential criteria were considered for inclusion in Sieve 3, but not taken forward, for the following reasons:
• Major Services (gas pipelines, water pipelines, electricity transmission lines): Discounted due to detailed data and information not being available at this strategic stage of assessment.
• Drainage: Discounted as drainage is a site specific matter that would be dealt with at the planning application stage.
• Commercial and economic issues: Discounted due to this information being problematic to quantify and score consistently and comparably. Economic resource viability issues are dealt with under Sieve 2.
• Mineral sterilisation: This is partly addressed through the Sieve 3 criterion: Proximity of allocated residential or built development. However, scoring resource areas/sites on the extent to which mineral may be vulnerable to sterilisation by other development if not allocated for extraction is not considered appropriate as part of the site selection methodology. Economically viable minerals in Hertfordshire will be afforded relevant protection by the designation of MSAs and MCAs, and the supporting development management policies adopted as part of the emerging MLP.
• Chalk streams: The inclusion of a criterion relating to chalk streams was raised during the public consultation. Whilst recognised as an important natural feature and habitat, it is possible for mineral extraction to occur in close proximity to a chalk stream. This is
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 11 March 2017
considered to be a site specific issue that would be dealt with at the planning application stage.
• Sensitive receptors: The inclusion of an additional criterion to assess proximity of potential mineral extraction sites to particularly sensitive receptors was raised during the public consultation. Such considerations beyond those criteria already included in Sieve 3, are considered.
3.31 It is important to bear in mind that mineral workings are considered to be compatible with certain constraints such as Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land and Green Belt. Whilst the PPG includes ‘impact on BMV land’ as an environmental issue that must be addressed by MPAs, minerals extraction is not precluded on this land designation. Paragraph 12 of the NPPF states that: “Local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality.”
3.32 It has long been recognised that minerals working can be accommodated on BMV agricultural land provided that high environmental standards are maintained, best practice soil handling techniques are adhered to and sites are well restored. The PPG goes on to require that where mineral working is proposed on BMV land, the outline restoration and aftercare strategy should show, where practicable, how the methods used in the restoration and aftercare enable the land to retain its longer term capability, though the proposed after-use need not always be for agriculture.
3.33 The NPPF states that the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts, noting that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. Paragraph 90 of the NPPF lists those forms of development which are not inappropriate in Green Belt provided that they “preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belt”. These potential exemptions include mineral extraction, (largely because this is recognised as being a temporary use of land, with a capability of delivering progressive restoration, and because minerals can only be worked where they occur).
3.34 It is important to note that some of the criteria identified in Table 3.1 (e.g. Cumulative Effects and Restoration) will also be able to be considered in greater detail once all potential resource areas/sites are known, as it is difficult to consider this solely on a site by site basis.
3.35 As shown in Table 3.1 each of the criteria was considered in detail and was not approached as a blanket constraint. As noted earlier, in some cases a potential effect can be made acceptable through the use of appropriate mitigation and it is important that the sieve methodology does not pre-judge matters that should more properly be dealt with at the planning application stage. The assessment of a site and/or area against each of these criteria will not result in a simple yes or no; a range of evaluation scores and assumptions for each consideration have been developed, complementing the approach that has been undertaken during the SA of the Minerals Local Plan.
3.36 The information used to assess sites and areas against the criteria in Table 3.1 was provided from a range of sources including spatial data in GIS form, HCC’s own expertise (such as the Highways Team and the Minerals and Waste Planning Team), accessible online data sources maintained by statutory consultees (e.g. Environment Agency) and other sources of relevant environmental and sustainability information. However, data for some of the criteria, such as restoration opportunities and other unique local factors were not able to be supplied in GIS format. Such data was sought through the Call for Sites, from those putting forward potential sites and areas for consideration and/or from other stakeholders. In addition, the baseline information and findings from other studies undertaken by and for the Council such as the Sustainability Appraisal, Habitats Regulations Assessment and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment has been used.
3.37 Finally, while most of the site selection judgements throughout the Sieves were completed through a desk-based review of relevant information, site visits were also undertaken during Sieve 3 to verify judgements made on site.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 12 March 2017
3.38 In order to record the findings of the site selection process, a simple proforma (see Appendix 1) has been completed for each site or area, compiling information derived from GIS analysis of spatial data (e.g. proximity to environmental designations and sensitive or incompatible existing / planned development) and other (non-GIS) factors, and providing a score for each criterion. The scores for each site against all criteria are summarised in Table 6.2. This approach provides a simple but effective way to evaluate sites in a consistent, robust and transparent manner. In addition, at the bottom of each site proforma, summaries of the findings of the landscape and visual sensitivity and HCC Highways assessments were recorded. These findings were taken into account alongside the Sieve 3 criteria judgements to help identify the site options likely to be most suitable for allocation within the Plan.
3.39 In the Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Study the sensitivity of individual site options was assessed using a five point sensitivity scale:
• High • Moderate High • Moderate • Low Moderate • Low 3.40 Sites and preferred areas considered to have a ‘High’ and ‘Moderate High’ sensitivity overall were considered to be of ‘High’ sensitivity in the site selection study (and colour-coded red); sites and preferred areas of ‘Moderate’ sensitivity were considered to be of ‘Moderate’ sensitivity in the site selection study (and colour-coded amber); and sites of ‘Low Moderate’ and ‘Low’ sensitivity overall were considered to be of ‘Low’ sensitivity in the site selection study (and colour-coded green).
3.41 The HCC Highway findings used a similar three tier ‘Red-Amber-Green’ scoring system to determine the potential impact of the site options on the local highway network. Therefore, sites which scored ‘Green’, ‘Amber’ and ‘Red’ in the HCC Highways Assessment were considered to be ‘Low’, ‘Moderate’ and ‘High’ in the site selection study, respectively. Sites that were unable to be assessed in the HCC Highways Study due to a lack of information were scored ‘Grey’.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 13 March 2017
Table 3.1: Evaluation Framework for Sieve 3
3.42 The scoring key used in the evaluation framework is outlined below. As described above, the justification and reasoning behind the score given is detailed in the ‘justification’ section of each site/preferred area assessment proforma, thereby ensuring transparency and understanding of the decisions made. The completed proforma can be found in Appendix 1. Key
Score Description
Positive There are positive impacts or benefits/enhancements.
Low There are no/insignificant impact(s)/ issue(s).
Medium There is a minor/moderate impact/issue which may be acceptable (and may involve mitigation).
High There is a major impact/issue which may or may not be adequately mitigated.
Very High There is an impact on a site or area of international or national significance within which working will only be permitted once an exception or alternative test in national policy have been met.
Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
Airport Safeguarding Zones Aircraft are vulnerable to N/A Maps provided by HCC. birdstrikes, and 80% of all strikes occur on an aircraft’s take-off or Sites or areas located outside of an landing phase of flight, therefore Airport Safeguarding Zone. highlighting the necessity for wildlife management on and within Sites or areas located within an proximity of an airfield. Aerodrome Airport Safeguarding Zone. administrators are responsible for administering bird activity with a N/A 13km radius of the aerodrome. This is to mitigate the bird strike N/A risk to aircraft and be aware of what species are in the local area.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 14 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
Many types of development can attract birds, including large-flat roofed structures, landfill sites, gravel pit restoration schemes and nature reserves.
Ancient Woodland Ancient woodland is afforded The potential for positive effects on Natural England’s Ancient protection through the NPPF, which ancient woodland is dependent on Woodland inventory. notes that it is irreplaceable. Local the exact nature and proposed
planning authorities should refuse design of the restoration of the planning permission for minerals site, which may protect or development resulting in the loss increase the ecological connectivity or deterioration of ancient of the woodland. However, this will woodland, unless the need for, and not be known until the planning benefits of, the development in application stage. that location clearly outweigh the
loss.
Sites or areas which are distant from ancient woodland.
Sites or areas which lie in close proximity to ancient woodland.
Sites or areas which are immediately adjacent to ancient woodland.
Sites or areas that partly or entirely within ancient woodland.
Aquifers Aquifer designations are defined in N/A Environment Agency Dataset. the EU Water Framework Directive, and these designations reflect the Sites or areas which are outside of importance of aquifers in terms of a designated aquifer. groundwater as a resource (drinking water supply) but also Sites or areas which are located
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 15 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
their role in supporting water flows partly or entirely within a and wetland ecosystems. Mitigation Secondary Aquifer. measures and/or a precautionary approach to the operation of Sites or areas which are located mineral workings can often be partly or entirely within a Principal implemented. However, this is Aquifer. unlikely to be known until the planning application stage. N/A GIS information from HCC. BAP Priority Species or Habitats The NPPF requires that, where The restoration of minerals sites is Any relevant information from the possible, biodiversity loss, increasingly adopting innovative HRA. including direct loss of habitats and practice and this could have indirect losses through the positive effects on BAP Priority Information provided through the fragmentation of green Species and Habitats for Call for Sites. infrastructure networks, should be restoration to nature conservation. avoided. It is also necessary to However, this would be very consider sites that are not afforded dependent on the exact nature and statutory protection but are of local proposed design of the restoration importance; especially those that of the minerals site, which may not provide ecological connectivity be known until the planning (including BAP habitats). application stage.
Sites or areas which are outside of areas known to include BAP Priority Species or Habitats.
Sites or areas which are partly within areas known to include BAP Priority Species and Habitats.
Sites or areas that are entirely within areas known to include BAP Priority Species and Habitats.
N/A
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 16 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
BMV Land Minerals extraction is not precluded N/A National datasets on BMV. It has long been recognised that minerals working Sites or areas not located within can be accommodated on best and BMV Land or on lower grades (not most versatile (BMV) agricultural 1, 2 or 3). land, provided that high environmental standards are Sites or areas located within higher maintained, best practice soil grades of BMV land. handling techniques are adhered to and sites are well restored. N/A Although, the potential to ensure these standards may not be known N/A until the planning application stage.
Cumulative effects The NPPF states that local planning Opportunities exist for contributing Table 2: permitted sand and gravel authorities should take into to a landscape-scale approach to extraction sites in Hertfordshire account the cumulative effect of mineral extraction and restoration. and Table 6: permitted chalk multiple impacts from individual For example, this could include extraction sites in Hertfordshire sites and/or from a number of sites contributions to identified green from HCC’s Local Aggregate in a locality. The 250m buffer used infrastructure networks or Assessment 2015. to assess the potential cumulative corridors, but will depend upon the
impacts of sites in close proximity information available regarding is a precautionary distance which is such initiatives. Knowledge from HCC officers. often used in site selection studies
of this kind. The NPPF states that Sites or areas that are distant from local planning authorities must put existing mineral sites (greater than in place policies that ensure high 250m away), or sites that are quality restoration and aftercare of adjacent to or within close mineral sites takes place, including proximity to existing mineral sites for agriculture (safeguarding the but are distant from sensitive long term potential of best and receptors and settlements. most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources), Sites or areas that are adjacent or geodiversity, biodiversity, native in close proximity to existing woodland, the historic environment mineral sites (less than 250m) and
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 17 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
and recreation. within close proximity to the same settlement or sensitive receptor(s). Opportunities may sometimes exist for the creation of positive cumulative effects by adopting a N/A landscape-scale approach to mineral extraction and restoration N/A - for example by creating or re- establishing wildlife corridors and connectivity of habitats; by creating water storage / flood alleviation features; and/or by creating aesthetically pleasing landscape features. Ecological status of water bodies The EU Water Framework Directive N/A Visual analysis of Ordnance Survey (2000/60/EC) looks at the (OS) base maps. ecological health of both Sites or areas which are not Any relevant information from the groundwater and surface water located near to a water body. HRA. with the aim of achieving ‘good ecological status’ by 2027, and to Sites or areas located adjacent to a ensure that there is no water body. deterioration from existing statuses. Sites or areas located within the boundary of a water body. The operation of mineral extraction sites can have a number of different impacts on habitats and N/A species either within the boundary of the extraction site or in proximity to the site. There may be the potential for water pollution e.g. through addition of dust and silts to waterbodies or through accidental spills or run-off of oil from machinery for example. Thereby affecting the ecological status of water bodies.
Noise and vibration arising from
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 18 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
sand and gravel extraction could also affect aquatic species, however, it should be possible to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts, for example by timing works to avoid critical periods (e.g. spawning or breeding periods), or preventing work from being undertaken at night to avoid disturbance to nocturnal species (e.g. otters).
Flood risk As stated in the PPG, local Some sites, which may dewater, GIS information from HCC. authorities should take a sequential may hold the potential to store
approach to developing in areas at excess water in times of heavy risk of flooding, giving preference rain, which would be seen as a to locating development in Flood positive in terms of preventing Zone 1, followed by Flood Zone 2 flood risk. However, this may not then Flood Zone 3. be known until the planning application stage. Minerals working and processing (except sand & gravel working) are classed as less vulnerable, which
means that they are potentially compatible with all flood zones Sites or areas located within Flood except for Flood Zone 3b, the Zones 1-3a, and sand and gravel functional floodplain7. Sand and sites located within 3b. gravel workings are classed as water-compatible development and N/A are potentially suitable for all flood zones including 3b, the functional N/A floodplain. However, National Planning Practice Guidance8 also states that mineral workings N/A should not increase flood risk elsewhere and need to be designed, worked and restored
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 19 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
accordingly.
Geodiversity National and locally important sites The site provides one or more GIS information from HCC. of geological/geomorphological opportunities for the creation of Information provided through the interest (e.g. Local Geological new geological exposures and /or Call for Sites. Sites, formerly RIGS) should be for the creation of geodiversity protected under the NPPF. trails. Although it is noted that quarrying often provides substantial Sites or areas that are either opportunities for the creation of distant from geological new geological exposures and for conservation sites, or which hold the creation of geodiversity trails. opportunities to incorporate, enhance or preserve important The NPPF requires planning geological features within the site. authorities to aim to prevent harm to geological conservation interests Sites or areas that are within or through the use of criteria based adjacent to national sites of policies, including minimising geological interest (SSSI) or Local impacts on geodiversity. Mineral Geological Sites (LGS), other than sites can potentially contribute to those which are classed as ‘finite’ geodiversity by preserving and sites. conserving geological features/landscapes that contribute Sites or areas that are within towards the link between people, landscape and their culture. geological or geomorphological However, due to the methods of SSSIs which have been classified extraction and processing, this is as ‘finite’ sites. more likely at less intensive sites (e.g. building stone) than N/A aggregate sites.
Green Belt NPPF states that the Government N/A GIS information from HCC; check attaches great importance to Green the purposes for its designation Belts, noting that the fundamental Sites or areas located outside of does not conflict with mineral aim of Green Belt policy is to Green Belt and/or site located working. prevent urban sprawl by keeping within Green Belt but do not land permanently open; the conflict with the purposes for its
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 20 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
essential characteristics of Green designation. Belts are their openness and their permanence. The NPPF lists Sites or areas located within Green mineral extraction as a form of Belt which conflict with the development which is not purposes for its designation. inappropriate in Green Belt providing that it preserves the N/A openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes N/A of including land in Green Belt.
Groundwater vulnerability The NPPF states that local planning N/A GIS information from HCC. authorities should set out environmental criteria against Sites or areas located within which planning applications will be Source Protection Zone 4 or assessed so as to ensure that outside of all Source Protection permitted operations do not have Zones. unacceptable adverse impacts on the natural environment, including Sites or areas located within from impacts on the flow and Source Protection Zones 2 and 3. quantity of surface and groundwater and migration of Sites or areas located within contamination from sites. The Source Protection Zone 1. extent to which a minerals extraction site will affect N/A groundwater on a potential site depends on the type of mineral worked, site design and characteristics, and the geological conditions. Mineral sites that are in Source Protection Zone (SPZ) 1 could potentially lead to loss of contaminants or accidental pollution incidents. Potential for adverse effects on water quality will also be assessed at the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 21 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
planning application stage.
Heritage designations Heritage designations are N/A GIS national datasets from Historic protected by the NPPF. These England. include Scheduled Monuments, Sites or areas which do not overlap GIS information from HCC and Listed Buildings, Conservation with heritage designations. district authorities. Areas, and Registered Historic Parks and Gardens. Such Sites of areas which partly overlap designations may be directly or are immediately adjacent to affected by minerals workings heritage designations. through their removal or damage, or by affecting their setting. Sites or areas that contain heritage designations. Whilst the setting of heritage assets can be a critical part of their significance, it is not possible to Sites or areas that are partly or consider this at the strategic entirely within an international planning stage. This will be an and/or national heritage important consideration at the designation. planning application stage. Working of minerals can lead to the investigation and recording of archaeological deposits, increasing knowledge and understanding. In addition, the restoration of a minerals site may improve the setting of a heritage asset. However it is not practicable to consider such issues at the strategic planning stage, but could be important issues at the planning application stage.
International and national International and national The potential for positive effects on GIS national datasets from Natural ecological designations ecological designations are ecological designations is England’s MAGIC database. protected through European and dependent on the exact nature and
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 22 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
National legislation. Such sites proposed design of the restoration GIS information from HCC. include Ramsar sites, Special Areas of the minerals site, which may not Information provided through the of Conservation (SACs), Special be known until the planning Call for Sites. Protection Areas (SPAs), Sites of application stage. Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and National Nature Reserves Sites or areas which are distant (NNRs). from international and national ecological designations. These nature conservation designations are given the highest Sites or areas which lie in close level of protection and therefore proximity to international and should be protected against harm national ecological designations. and in general mineral extraction within them should be avoided. Sites or areas which are However, it is recognised that in immediately adjacent to occasional situations, minerals international and/or national development can have positive ecological designations. effects on these designations. For example, through the provision of flood alleviation or the creation of Sites or areas that are partly or specific habitats. entirely within international and/or national ecological designations.
Land ownership The extent to which options put N/A Information provided through the forward by industry are within their Call for Sites. control can have a bearing on the Sites in the control of the industry. likelihood sites will be available during the emerging MLP plan Sites not in the control of the period. industry.
N/A
N/A
Landscape designations Landscape Designations (e.g. The restoration of minerals sites is GIS national datasets from Natural AONB) are protected by the NPPF. increasingly adopting innovative England’s MAGIC database. Both national and local landscape practice and this could have
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 23 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
designations may be affected by positive effects on landscape GIS information from HCC. the development of mineral designations. However, this would Information provided through the workings. Landscape designations be very dependent on the exact Call for Sites. in poor condition could be nature and proposed design of the enhanced through high quality restoration of the minerals site, restoration. However, this will not which may not be known until the be able to be determined until the planning application stage. planning application stage. Sites which are outside of landscape designations.
Sites which are partly within or immediately adjacent to landscape designations.
Sites that are entirely within landscape designations.
Sites or areas that are partly or entirely within international and/or national landscape designations. GIS information from HCC. Local Nature Reserves and/or Local Locally important sites of nature The restoration of minerals sites is Any relevant information from the Wildlife Sites conservation should be protected increasingly adopting innovative HRA. under the NPPF. Where possible, practice and this could have biodiversity loss, including direct positive effects on local nature Information provided through the loss of habitats and indirect losses reserves for restoration to nature Call for Sites. through the fragmentation of green conservation. However, this would infrastructure networks, should be be very dependent on the exact avoided. It is also necessary to nature and proposed design of the consider sites that are not afforded restoration of the minerals site, statutory protection but are of local which may not be known until the importance; especially those that planning application stage. provide ecological connectivity. However, the level of detail to aid Sites or areas which are outside of understanding of potential impacts Local Nature Reserves and/or Local
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 24 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
on Local Nature Reserves and/or Wildlife Sites. Local Wildlife Sites would not be known until the planning Sites or areas which are partly application stage. within or immediately adjacent to Local Nature Reserves and/or Local Wildlife Sites.
Sites or areas that are entirely within Local Nature Reserves and/or Local Wildlife Sites.
N/A
Proximity of allocated residential or There could be potential for land N/A Data on housing allocations from built development use conflict where minerals sites HCC. are within or in close proximity to Sites or areas are located away Visual analysis of relevant Local areas allocated for future from planned built development. Plan maps for areas planned for residential or built development, as future residential development, mineral resources could be Sites or areas are located in close however, the certainty of these sterilised or mineral operations proximity to or adjacent to planned development locations depends on could conflict with the neighbouring built development. the status of the Local Plan in sensitive land uses. Mineral question, i.e. how close to sterilisation could be avoided via Sites or areas are located within Adoption it is. prior extraction. Conflict between the boundary of planned built mineral operations and sensitive development. land uses could be mitigated by the use of stand-off distances, noise N/A bunds and visual screening. However, the potential for this to occur would not be known until the planning application stage for either land use.
Recreation The NPPF requires that planning Sites or areas that have the GIS information from HCC, plus decisions should guard against the potential for major enhancements analysis of OS base map for other unnecessary loss of valued social, for existing Public Rights of Way, types of leisure/ recreational
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 25 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
recreational and cultural facilities open spaces or recreational facilities and open spaces. Analysis and services, particularly where facilities and/or the development of of Sustrans Maps will be completed this would reduce the community’s new Public Rights of Way, open for cycle routes. ability to meet its day-to-day spaces or recreational facilities. needs. Sites could have effects on the amenity of users of Public Sites or areas that have the Rights of Way, open spaces (e.g. potential for minor enhancements common land, access land, and for existing Public Rights of Way, community forests) and open spaces or recreational recreational facilities if they are in facilities, or are located away from close proximity. There may also be Public Rights of Way, open spaces opportunities for enhancement to or recreational facilities. recreational facilities during the development of particular mineral Sites or areas that are located sites, as set out in the NPPF. In within close proximity of Public addition, there may be Rights of Way, open spaces or opportunities to create new recreational facilities. recreation areas/open spaces during the restoration of mineral Sites or areas that are adjacent to sites. or are located within the boundary of Public Rights of Way, open spaces or recreational facilities.
N/A
Restoration The NPPF states that local planning N/A Information provided through the authorities must put in place Call for Sites.
policies that ensure high quality restoration and aftercare of mineral Sites or areas where there are sites takes place, including for clear opportunities for high quality agriculture (safeguarding the long restoration and aftercare. term potential of best and most
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 26 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
versatile agricultural land and Sites or areas where there are conserving soil resources), some opportunities for high quality geodiversity, biodiversity, native restoration and aftercare. woodland, the historic environment and recreation. Appropriate restoration (i.e. the formation of final landform Sites or areas where there is no contours and replacement of soils) prospect of restoration and and reclamation (i.e. making the reclamation to an appropriate site suitable for an appropriate future land use. after-use), has always been an important aspect of mineral N/A planning and is specified by conditions attached to most modern mineral permissions. Restoration should take place at the earliest opportunity, during a phased extraction or if appropriate upon completion of quarrying.
Sensitive land uses Minerals sites could have effects on N/A Visual analysis of Ordnance Survey the health and amenity of local (OS) base maps. residents and communities from Sites or areas are distant from dust, noise and vibration. The NPPF sensitive land uses. is clear that MPAs should ensure that unavoidable noise, dust and Sites or areas are in close particle emissions and any blasting proximity to sensitive land uses. vibrations are controlled and mitigated or removed at source. Sites or areas are located adjacent Past (e.g. Minerals Policy to or within the boundary of Statement 2) and current guidance sensitive land uses. (e.g. NPPF) state that residential properties and other sensitive uses N/A can be affected by dust up to 1km from the source, and that concerns are most likely to be experienced
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 27 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
near to sources, generally within 100m depending on site characteristics and in the absence of appropriate mitigation.
National datasets and OS base Sustainable transport The NPPF states that plans and N/A map. decisions should ensure developments that generate Sites or areas with direct access to GIS information from HCC. significant movements can the rail network or navigable Information provided through the maximise the use of sustainable waterway network. transport modes. Call for Sites. Sites or areas with economically The majority of minerals sites will viable access to the rail network or involve road transportation with navigable waterway network. some involving more movements than others. However, proximity to Sites or areas distant from the rail rail lines/depots/sidings, network or navigable waterway rivers/canals or wharves could network. provide opportunities to explore more sustainable modes of transporting minerals. N/A
Sustainable transport and pollution Environmental receptors, including N/A Visual analysis of Ordnance Survey to the environment (dust, air, humans, are protected from (OS) base maps.
water) pollution through a number of GIS information from HCC. planning and environmental regulations. Mineral workings have Information provided through the the potential to result to pollution Sites or areas where associated Call for Sites. of water courses, aquifers and the traffic would not be likely to travel air. However, there are strict through an Air Quality environmental controls in place to Management Area, or are located prevent this occurring at the site adjacent to a strategic road level. Potential for adverse effects network. on surface water quality will be assessed at the planning Sites or areas where associated
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 28 March 2017 Criterion Justification Scoring Data available
application stage. traffic would be likely to travel through an Air Quality Proposals for all types of minerals Management Area, or are in close sites could contribute to increasing proximity to a strategic road air pollution with regards to network. minerals transportation by road, as well as any air pollution associated Sites or areas located within an Air with the operation of the sites and Quality Management Area, or not processes used such as dust from in close proximity to a strategic blasting, crushing and processing. road network. The further vehicles transporting minerals have to travel along local N/A roads (i.e. not on the primary road network), the higher the potential for more localised air pollution as they are likely to travel more slowly on local roads. In addition, if the mineral site is within, or vehicles are travelling through, AQMAs where existing air pollution issues have been identified, there is more potential for negative effects on air quality.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 29 March 2017 4 Site Selection Methodology for Brick Clay
4.1 NPPF paragraph 146 requires MPAs to plan for at least 25 years’ supply of brick clay, through the provision of a stock of permitted reserves sufficient to support the level of actual and proposed investment required for new and existing plant and the maintenance and improvement of existing plant and equipment. The extant Minerals Local Plan was produced before the introduction of the NPPF, and had not planned for a 25 year stock of clay reserves. The Council therefore has no previous site selection methodology for brick clay.
4.2 The location of the brick clay resource is provided by the BGS mineral resource information for development plans. No other detailed information is known to exist, within the public domain. This is not least because of the specialist nature of the bricks produced in this area and the relatively unusual nature of the Reading Formation and Clay-with-Flints resources which are used. These factors dictate different methods of extraction and processing, compared with those used in much larger brick pits (for example in neighbouring Bedfordshire) where the resources tend to be thicker and more consistent, and they also influence which parts of the resource can be utilised. There is one remaining brick clay works in Hertfordshire: Bovingdon Bricks.
4.3 With the geology highly variable and the brick clay production very specialist in its nature, a detailed assessment such as that proposed for sand and gravel is not possible for brick clay for the purpose of the MLP. As an industrial mineral, the full hierarchy of Specific Sites, Preferred Areas and Areas of Search is not applicable to Brick Clay; MPAs are simply required to provide a stock of permitted reserves of at least 25 years. However, in view of the lack of sufficiently detailed geological information to identify an appropriate area more precisely, it was proposed during the consultation on the methodology that the whole resource will be identified as a Mineral Safeguarding Area, and a policy for clay included within the Minerals Local Plan.
4.4 However, two specific sites for brick clay have been put forward during the Call for Sites process, therefore these two sites (MLPCS013 and MLPCS020) have been subject to the Sieve 3 detailed site assessment (described in Chapter 3).
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 30 March 2017 5 Mineral Safeguarding
5.1 Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) and Mineral Consultation Areas (MCAs) are complementary aspects of ensuring that important mineral resources remain available for use by future generations, rather than being needlessly ‘sterilised’ (rendered unavailable for extraction) by other forms of development.
5.2 The reasoning behind this, as noted in paragraph 2.3.1 of the British Geological Survey (BGS) report ‘Mineral safeguarding in England: good practice advice’12 is that mineral resources are finite and can only be worked where they naturally occur.
5.3 Safeguarding of selected mineral resources also helps to ensure that the planning system retains the flexibility to identify potential areas for future extraction which would have the least impact on the environment, if they were ever worked, whilst not creating a presumption that such working will necessarily occur.
5.4 Safeguarding is therefore a specific requirement identified in paragraph 143 of the NPPF which states that, in preparing Local Plans, local planning authorities should (inter alia): “define Minerals Safeguarding Areas …… and define Minerals Consultation Areas based on these”. However, it should be noted that whilst MCAs should be based on the MSAs, the two areas need not coincide completely.
5.5 The PPG defines both MSAs and MCAs as: • Minerals Safeguarding Area – an area designated by a MPA which covers known deposits of minerals which are desired to be kept safeguarded from unnecessary sterilisation by non- mineral development.
• Minerals Consultation Area – a geographical area, based on a Mineral Safeguarding Area, where the district or borough council should consult the MPA for any proposals for non- minerals development.
5.6 In addition, paragraph 143 makes clear that MPAs should also safeguard: • existing, planned and potential rail heads, rail links to quarries, wharfage and associated storage, handling and processing facilities for the bulk transport by rail, sea or inland waterways of minerals, including recycled, secondary and marine-dredged materials; and
• existing, planned and potential sites for concrete batching, the manufacture of coated materials, other concrete products and the handling, processing and distribution of substitute, recycled and secondary aggregate material.
5.7 HCC already has an adopted Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) relating to MCAs, which will be reviewed as part of the Minerals Local Plan Review and consolidated into the Plan itself. Whilst the current SPD identifies MCAs as a statutory consultation mechanism, it does not explicitly identify MSAs, as required by the NPPF. The difference may appear to be a subtle one (since MCAs are now required to be based on MSAs), but it is nevertheless important because MCAs alone do not explicitly safeguard the resources.
5.8 MSAs are the means by which the resource outcrops affected by mineral safeguarding policies are meant to be identified in Minerals Local Plans; whereas MCAs are intended to show the areas within which local district councils (in two-tier authorities) should consult with the MPAs on relevant development proposals (which proposals that fall into this category are defined through policy). Whilst MSA and MCA boundaries can be coincident, they need not be: MSAs will usually cover the whole of a particular resource outcrop (unless that outcrop is very extensive and largely unconstrained, in which case only certain parts of it might need to be safeguarded); whereas MCAs may:
12 Mineral safeguarding in England: good practice advice. Wrighton et. al., 2011.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 31 March 2017 • extend beyond the minerals resource to incorporate a ‘buffer’ beyond the outcrop boundary, to protect the resource from sterilisation by proximal development;
• exclude areas of the MSA that have already been sterilised e.g. residential areas and therefore do not require consultation; and/or,
• exclude certain types of development that would not normally bring about the sterilisation of a resource through use of an exceptions policy. Such development would include householder extension or advertisement applications for example.
Methodology
5.9 The basic procedures for minerals safeguarding are clearly set out in the BGS guidance referred to above. This is explicitly referenced in the online PPG (most recently revised in March 2014) and is therefore a formal expectation of national policy.
5.10 The procedures comprise the following sequential steps (note that the guidance currently refers to Core Strategies and Development Plan Documents, but these terms have been updated below to refer to Local Plans in accordance with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012):
• Step 1: Identify the best geological and mineral resource information.
• Step 2: Decide which mineral resources to safeguard and the physical extent of MSAs. • Step 3: Undertake Consultation on MSAs. • Step 4: Decide on the approach to safeguarding in the Local Plan. • Step 5: Include Development Management Policies in the Local Plan. • Step 6: Include safeguarding in District-level Local Plans. • Step 7: Include mineral assessments in the local list of information requirements. 5.11 Of these, Step 1 is effectively covered by the same work that has been undertaken during the sand and gravel site selection procedure and the initial resource identification for brick clay, and utilised the same (‘best available’) mineral resource information. As explained in Chapter 3, this comprised the BGS digital resource information together with relevant material (including borehole data) from the Industrial Mineral Assessment Unit (IMAU) reports and any other readily available information which was able to refine the BGS maps, following the advice set out in section 4.1 of the BGS guidance). In practice, this primarily involved excluding areas of resource which have already been worked.
5.12 The starting point for Step 2, as agreed with HCC, was that the MSAs should cover only sand and gravel and brick clay resources. The physical extent of those resources has been based on the detailed information identified in Step 1. In accordance with paragraphs 4.2.9 to 4.2.11 of the BGS guidance, the MSAs cover the whole of the mapped resource areas and do NOT exclude areas which are already subject to other designations or those which are already sterilised by existing urban development. Rather, they are defined purely by the physical boundaries of the resource itself (including areas concealed beneath overburden, where this is shallow enough to permit economic extraction of the mineral) together with a suggested ‘buffer’ of 100 metres.
5.13 The Step 3 consultation will form part of the public consultation scheduled for Summer 2017. However, feedback from the Interested Parties Workshop (19th March 2015) has helped inform the site selection methodologies, which has also contributed usefully to the consultation required. In particular the consultation scheduled for Summer 2017 will contribute to final decisions regarding the extent of economically viable resources; the width of buffer zones applied to MSAs; and the extent to which MCA boundaries might justifiably differ from those of the MSAs (e.g. to exclude areas of existing built development).
5.14 Steps 4 to 6, relating to the development of corresponding policies etc. are beyond the scope of this study, although they have been informed by the Interested Parties Workshop and will also be informed by the wider consultation process.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 32 March 2017 5.15 Step 7, relating to the determination of planning applications within MSAs, is clearly beyond the scope of this site selection study.
Proposed MSAs and MCAs
5.16 Figure 5.1 shows the extent of the sand and gravel resource within Hertfordshire and Figure 5.2 shows the proposed MSA for sand and gravel. Figure 5.3 shows the brick clay resource within Hertfordshire and Figure 5.4 shows the proposed MSA for brick clay. Note that the proposed MCAs for sand and gravel and brick clay are the same as the MSAs shown in Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.4.13
13 Both the defined MSA and the defined MCA include a 100m buffer area for sand and gravel and brick clay.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 33 March 2017 Bedford South Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Mineral District Local Plan Review
Figure 5.1: Sand & Gravel Milton Keynes Resources in Hertfordshire
Hertfordshire County boundary Central Bedfordshire District boundary Uttlesford District *Sand & gravel resources North Hertfordshire District * Derived from 1:50,000 scale BGS digital data under Licence 2000/035, British Geological Survey © NERC’
Stevenage District Luton
East Hertfordshire District
Aylesbury Vale District
Dacorum St. Harlow District Albans District District
Welwyn Hatfield District
Broxbourne District Epping Forest District
Chiltern Watford Hertsmere District District District Three Rivers Enfield District Wycombe District Map Scale @ A3: 1:210,000 Barnet Waltham Forest Havering Harrow Redbridge Hillingdon 0 5 10 Haringey E k m Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crow n copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig5-1_MLP_SandGravel_Resource_A3L 08/03/2017 S ource: LUC, BGS , Cuesta Consulting Lim ited Reproduced with the perm ission of the British Geological Survey © NERC. All rights Reserved. Bedford South Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Mineral District Local Plan Review
Figure 5.2: Proposed Mineral Milton Keynes Safeguarding Areas for Sand & Gravel Resources in Hertfordshire
Hertfordshire County boundary Central Bedfordshire District boundary Uttlesford *Proposed Mineral Safeguarding District Area (Sand & Gravel), includes North 100m buffer Hertfordshire District *Derived from 1:50,000 scale BGS digital data under Licence 2000/035, British Geological Survey © NERC Stevenage District Luton
East Hertfordshire District
Aylesbury Vale District
Dacorum St. Harlow District Albans District District
Welwyn Hatfield District
Broxbourne District Epping Forest District
Chiltern Watford Hertsmere District District District Three Rivers Enfield District Wycombe District Map Scale @ A3: 1:210,000 Barnet Waltham Forest Havering Harrow Redbridge Hillingdon 0 5 10 Haringey E km Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig5-2_MLP_SandGravel_MSA_A3L 08/03/2017 Source: LUC, BGS, Cuesta Consulting Limited Reproduced with the permission of the British Geological Survey © NERC. All rights Reserved. Bedford South Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Mineral District Local Plan Review
Figure 5.3: Brick Clay Resources Milton Keynes in Hertfordshire
Hertfordshire Coun ty boun dary Central Bedfordshire District boun dary Uttlesford District *Brick clay resources North Hertfordshire District *Derived from 1:50,000 scale BGS digital data un der Licence 2000/035, British Geological Survey © NERC’
Stevenage District Luton
East Hertfordshire District
Aylesbury Vale District
Dacorum St. Harlow District Albans District District
Welwyn Hatfield District
Broxbourne District Epping Forest District
Chiltern Watford Hertsmere District District District Three Rivers Enfield District Wycombe District Map Scale @ A3: 1:210,000 Barnet Waltham Forest Havering Harrow Redbridge Hillingdon 0 5 10 Haringey E k m Con tains Ordnance Survey data © Crow n copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig5-3_MLP_BrickClay_Resource_A3L 08/03/2017 Source: LUC, BGS, Cuesta Con sulting Limited Reproduced with the perm ission of the British Geological Survey © NERC. All rights Reserved. Bedford South Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Mineral District Local Plan Review
Figure 5.4: Proposed Mineral Milton Keynes Safeguarding Areas for Brick Clay Resources in Hertfordshire
Hertfordshire County boundary Central Bedfordshire District boundary Uttlesford *Proposed Mineral Safeguarding District Area (Brick Clay), includes North 100m buffer Hertfordshire District *Derived from 1:50,000 scale BGS digital data under Licence 2000/035, British Geological Survey © NERC Stevenage District Luton
East Hertfordshire District
Aylesbury Vale District
Dacorum St. Harlow District Albans District District
Welwyn Hatfield District
Broxbourne District Epping Forest District
Chiltern Watford Hertsmere District District District Three Rivers Enfield District Wycombe District Map Scale @ A3: 1:210,000 Barnet Waltham Forest Havering Harrow Redbridge Hillingdon 0 5 10 Haringey E km Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig5-4_MLP_BrickClay_MSA_A3L 08/03/2017 Source: LUC, BGS, Cuesta Consulting Limited Reproduced with the permission of the British Geological Survey © NERC. All rights Reserved. 6 Site and Preferred Area Assessment Findings
6.1 HCC received 19 submissions from landowners, agents or minerals operators during the 2016 Call for Sites exercise (proposing 18 sand and gravel sites and one brick clay site) and an additional brick clay site was subsequently submitted. In addition, HCC previously defined three preferred areas in the adopted MLP within which it had been considered that there was potential for defining further sand and gravel extraction sites if required. Table 6.1 sets out the sites submitted and Figure 6.1 illustrates their location within the County, and Figure 6.2 provides a closer view of individual site boundaries.
6.2 All 20 of the sites were put through the Sieve 1, 2 and 3 assessments described in Chapter 3. All three of the preferred areas were put through Sieve 1 and 2 and two of the preferred areas (1 and 2) progressed to Sieve 3. The detailed results of the sites and preferred area assessments are presented in Appendix 1.
Table 6.1: List of Sites put forward through the Call for Sites
Site ID Site Name Mineral to Extract
MLPCS001 Land at Cromer Hyde Farm Sand and Gravel
MLPCS002 Land at Salisbury Hall Sand and Gravel
MLPCS003 Land at Ware Park Sand and Gravel
MLPCS004 Land at Pynesfield Sand and Gravel
MLPCS00514 Nashe’s and Fairfold’s Farm Sand and Gravel
MLPCS006 Hatfield Aerodrome Sand and Gravel
MLPCS007 Barwick Sand and Gravel
MLPCS008 Hatfield – Furze Field Sand and Gravel
MLPCS009 Hatfield Quarry – Land adjoining Coopers Green Lane Sand and Gravel
MLPCS010 The Briggens Estate Sand and Gravel
MLPCS011 Water Hall Quarry – Farm Fields Area Sand and Gravel
MLPCS012 Water Hall Quarry – Broad Green Area Sand and Gravel
MLPCS013 Harry’s Field Brick Clay
MLPCS014 Water Hall Quarry – Bunkers Hill South Area Sand and Gravel
MLPCS015 Plashes Farm Sand and Gravel
MLPCS016 Water Hall Quarry – Howe Green Area Sand and Gravel
14 Site MLPCS005 has since been withdrawn and therefore has not been recommended as a potential site for inclusion in the plan.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 38 March 2017 Site ID Site Name Mineral to Extract
MLPCS017 Robins Nest Hill Sand and Gravel
MLPCS018 Southfield Wood East Sand and Gravel
MLPCS019 Pipers End Sand and Gravel
MLPCS020 Roundhill Wood Brick Clay
Preferred Areas
1 Land close to the existing Hatfield Quarry Sand and Gravel
2 Land to the north of the existing Rickneys Quarry Sand and Gravel
3 Land to the south-east of the existing Tyttenhanger Sand and Gravel Quarry
Sieve 1 – Major Constraints
6.3 As set out in Section 3, Sieve 1 sought to screen out sites and preferred areas that were known to affect absolute constraints to future minerals working. None of the 20 sites were screened out at this stage.
6.4 Details of the sites’ Sieve 1 assessments can be found in the proforma in Appendix 1.
Sieve 2 – Resource Assessment
6.5 Similar to Sieve 1, no sites were screened out at Sieve 2. 6.6 As can be seen from the results of the Sieve 2 assessment (Appendix 1), ten of the twenty sites put forward for consideration (including both brick clay sites) were considered to have adequately demonstrated economic viability and deliverability during the Plan period. All ten of these sites were put forward by mineral operators/brick manufacturers:
• MLPCS002 • MLPCS003 • MLPCS004 • MLPCS006 • MLPCS008 • MLPCS009 • MLPCS010 • MLPCS012 • MLPCS013 • MLPCS020 6.7 The remaining ten sites were considered not to have sufficient information to determine their economic viability and deliverability:
• MLPCS001 • MLPCS005
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 39 March 2017 • MLPCS007 • MLPCS011 • MLPCS014 • MLPCS015 • MLPCS016 • MLPCS017 • MLPCS018 • MLPCS019 6.8 Without the necessary information to disregard any of these sites as unviable or undeliverable, all 20 sites were taken through to Sieve 3, to consider their suitability against the environmental and social criteria in Sieve 3 (see below).
6.9 All three of the preferred areas were put through Sieve 1 and 2 and two of the preferred areas (1 and 2) progressed to Sieve 3. Preferred area 3 was not assessed at Sieve 3 due to the fact that the area has now been worked through extensions to the neighbouring Tyttenhanger Quarry. Consequently, Preferred area 3 can no longer be considered as a preferred area.
Sieve 3 – Detailed Site Assessments
6.10 Table 6.2 and 6.3 provide a visual summary of the suitability of each of the 20 sites against detailed site assessment criteria (with the sand and gravel sites and preferred areas presented in Table 6.2 and brick clay sites presented in Table 6.3). Table 6.4 and 6.5 then provide a discursive summary of the potential effects of the sand and gravel sites, brick clay sites and sand and gravel preferred areas respectively taking into account the assessments set out in Appendix 1, HCC Highways comments (Appendix 2) and the findings of the Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Study, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessments.
6.11 From Table 6.2 and 6.3 it can be seen that a number of the assessment criteria are unlikely to be affected by minerals development at any of the 20 promoted sites or two preferred areas, as shown by the green ‘positive’ or ‘low’ impact scores, e.g. flood risk, geodiversity, Green Belt and designated landscapes. In addition, many of the criteria may only have a medium or low impact, which should be able to be reduced or mitigated through mitigation measures incorporated into the development proposal and implemented during operation of the site. While some potentially high or very high impacts have been identified for all of the site options, these may also be able to be mitigated either through readjustment of site boundaries and/or mitigation measures implemented during design and operation (e.g. diversion of Public Right of Ways (PRoWs)). However, increasing the use of sustainable transport is unlikely to be improved through development of any of the potential mineral sites.
6.12 Following Table 6.4 and 6.5, a further summary table (Table 6.6) shows the potential sand and gravel sites and brick clay sites and sand and gravel preferred areas ranked in order of the number of very high, then high, then medium impacts.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 40 March 2017 Bedford South Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Mineral District Local Plan Review
Figure 6.1: Location of Sites in Milton Keynes County Context
Hertfordshire County boundary
District boundary
Central Mineral site Bedfordshire North Uttlesford Preferred area Hertfordshire District District
East Hertfordshire District
Stevenage District Luton
MLPCS015
MLPCS007 Aylesbury Vale District
Preferred Area No. 2 MLPCS003
MLPCS010 MLPCS001
MLPCS018 MLPCS009 St. MLPCS008 MLPCS019 MLPCS011 Dacorum Albans MLPCS005 MLPCS012 Harlow District District District MLPCS016 MLPCS020 MLPCS014 Preferred Area No. 1 MLPCS006 MLPCS017 Welwyn Hatfield District
MLPCS002 Preferred Area No. 3 Broxbourne MLPCS013 District Epping Forest District
Chiltern Watford Hertsmere District District District Three Rivers Enfield District Wycombe District Map Scale @ A3: 1:210,000 Barnet Waltham MLPCS004 Forest Havering Harrow Redbridge Hillingdon 0 5 10 Haringey E km Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig6-1_MLP_Sites_CountyOverview_A3L 10/02/2017 Source: LUC Hertfordshire Mineral Stevenage District Local Plan Review
Luton North Hertfordshire District Figure 6.2: Location of Sites Central MLPCS015 Bedfordshire Hertfordshire County boundary MLPCS007 District boundary Aylesbury Vale District East Mineral site Hertfordshire District Preferred area MLPCS003 Preferred Area No. 2
MLPCS010 MLPCS001
MLPCS018 MLPCS009 MLPCS019 MLPCS008 MLPCS011 MLPCS005 St. Albans MLPCS012 MLPCS016 MLPCS020 District MLPCS014 Dacorum Preferred Area No. 1 District MLPCS017 MLPCS006 Welwyn Hatfield District Broxbourne District MLPCS002 Preferred Area No. 3 MLPCS013 Epping Forest District
Watford Hertsmere District District Chiltern District Enfield Three Rivers District
Barnet MLPCS013 MLPCS004
Harrow Waltham Forest Haringey
Hillingdon South Bucks Map Scale @ A3: 1:155,000 District
Brent Islington Hackney Camden 0 5 10 E km Ealing Newham Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig6-2_MLP_Sites_ZoomOverview_A3L 10/02/2017 Source: LUC Table 6.2 : Summary of the suitability of each of the sand and gravel sites and preferred areas against detailed site assessment criteria
Assessment Criteria
Site ID
erves and and erves
itats Airport Safeguarding ZonesAirport Woodland Ancient Aquifers or Species Priority BAP Hab BMV Land Cumulative Effects of Water Ecological Status Bodies Flood Risk Geodiversity Belt Green Vulnerability Groundwater Designations Heritage and National International Ecological Designations Land Ownership Designations Landscape Nature ResLocal WildlifeLocal Sites of allocated Proximity or built residential development Recreation Restoration Uses Land Sensitive Sustainable transport Sustainable transport and the environmentto pollution
MLPCS001 Very Medium High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Positive Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low High High Medium High
MLPCS002 Low Low Medium Low Medium Low High Positive Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High Medium
MLPCS003 Low High Medium Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low High Low Low Low Low Positive Medium High Low High High High
MLPCS004 Low Low Medium Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low High Low Low Low Low Positive Medium Medium Low Medium High Low
15 MLPCS005 Medium High Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Low High Low Medium High High
MLPCS006 Medium Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Positive Medium High Low High High Low
MLPCS007 Low High Medium Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low High Medium High Medium Low Medium Medium High Low High High Medium
MLPCS008 Medium Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High High High
MLPCS009 Medium Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High Low
MLPCS010 Low High Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium High Low High High Low
MLPCS011 Low Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Low High Low Medium High High
MLPCS012 Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low High High High
MLPCS014 Low High Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High High
MLPCS015 Very Very Low Medium Medium Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Low High Low High High High High High
MLPCS016 Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Medium High High High
MLPCS017 Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Medium High High
MLPCS018 Low High Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low Medium High Medium
MLPCS019 Low Low Medium Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low High High High
Preferred Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low High Low Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low Medium High Low Area 1
Preferred Very Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low High Medium Low Medium Low Medium Low High Low Medium High Medium Area 2 High
15 Site MLPCS005 has since been withdrawn and therefore has not been recommended as a potential site for inclusion in the plan.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 43 March 2017 Table 6.3: Summary of the suitability of each of the brick clay sites against detailed site assessment criteria
Assessment Criteria
Site ID
ife Sites
tive Effects
Airport Safeguarding ZonesAirport Woodland Ancient Aquifers or Species Priority BAP Habitats BMV Land Cumula of Water Ecological Status Bodies Flood Risk Geodiversity Belt Green Vulnerability Groundwater Designations Heritage and National International Ecological Designations Land Ownership Designations Landscape Nature Reserves Local and Wildl Local of allocated Proximity or built residential development Recreation Restoration Uses Land Sensitive Sustainable transport Sustainable transport and the environmentto pollution
MLPCS013 Low Low Low Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Positive Low Medium Low High High High
MLPCS020 Low Very High High Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Very High High Low High Low High High High
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 44 March 2017 Table 6.4: Summary of the potential effects of the sand and gravel sites
Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
MLPCS001 Land at Cromer Welwyn 2.4 million tonnes The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Hyde Farm Hatfield development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a very high impact on heritage designations as the site is partly located within Brocket Hall Registered Park and Garden and a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to two areas of ancient woodland; • recreation as the site contains a PRoW and is adjacent to a number of additional PRoWs and the Brocket Park Golf Course; • sensitive land uses as the site is immediately adjacent to a number of residential properties; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway (this is the same for all of the site options). The site is considered to have an overall moderate-high landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections.
MLPCS001 is in close proximity to MLPCS005, MLPCS006, MLPCS008 and MLPCS009. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The cumulative effects would be greater with regard to sites
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 45 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
MLPCS008 and MLPCS009 as they are much closer than sites MLPCS005 and MLPCS006. The SA of this site option identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (air pollution of ecological sites), 2.1 (cultural heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). This assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS002 Land at Salisbury Hertsmere 860,000 The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Hall development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains a water body; • recreation as the site contains a PRoW and is immediately adjacent to a number of additional PRoWs and the Watford Football Club Training Ground; • sensitive land uses as a number of residential properties are located adjacent to the site; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 4.1 (water quality), 2.1 (cultural heritage) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objective 9.2 (recreation).
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 46 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
Therefore this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS003 Land at Ware East 2.6 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Park Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and local wildlife sites and BAP priority habitats or species as the proposed restoration includes woodland and a small area of wetland. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is located immediately adjacent to one area of ancient woodland; • groundwater as the site is partly located within Source Protection Zone 1; • recreation as the site contains a PRoW and is immediately adjacent to a number of additional PRoWs; • sensitive land uses as the site is located immediately adjacent to a number of residential properties; • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and • sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment.
The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objectives 3.1 (landscape) and 9.1 (health & amenity) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 4.1 (Water), 9.2 (recreation) and 1.3 (air
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 47 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
pollution of ecological sites). This assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS004 Land at Three Rivers 300,000 – 350,000 The site scored very well during the site assessment as it is Pynesfield considered that only two high impact is likely to occur which is on groundwater and sustainable transport as a result of the site’s lack of access to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The development of the site is also considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and local wildlife sites and BAP priority habitats and species as the proposed restoration includes a wetland sustainable drainage scheme. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has no fundamental highway objection, in principle.
The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objectives 9.2 (recreation loss) and 3.1 (landscape). In addition, the SA identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection) and 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects). Therefore, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS005 Nashe’s and St. Albans 1.25 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The (withdrawn) Fairfold’s Farm development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to one area of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 48 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
ancient woodland; • recreation as the site contains a PRoW and is adjacent to a number of additional PRoWs; • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and • sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall moderate-high landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. MLPCS005 is in close proximity to MLPCS001, MLPCS006, MLPCS008 and MLPCS009. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The cumulative effects would be greater with regard to site MLPCS006 as it is much closer than sites MLPCS001, MLPCS008 and MLPCS009. The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety). The SA identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above. Site MLPCS005 has since been withdrawn and therefore has not been recommended as a potential site for inclusion in the plan.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 49 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
MLPCS006 Hatfield St. Albans 8 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Aerodrome and Welwyn development of the site is considered likely to have a positive Hatfield impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and local wildlife sites and BAP priority species or habitats as the restoration proposals include the creation of grassland and wetland. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains two watercourses; • recreation as the site contains one PRoW and is used for informal recreation and is adjacent to the Hertfordshire Sports Village and a number of additional PRoWs; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS006 is in close proximity to MLPCS001, MLPCS005, MLPCS008 and MLPCS009. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The cumulative effects would be greater with regard to site MLPCS005 as it is much closer than sites MLPCS001, MLPCS008 and MLPCS009. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 50 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
against SA objectives 2.1 (heritage), 4.1 (Water) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety) and significant negative effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (Biodiversity and air quality), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). In addition, the SA also identifies a minor positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 6.2 (flood alleviation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS007 Barwick East Estimated at 5 The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Hertfordshire million tonnes development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to an area of ancient woodland; • the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains a watercourse; • groundwater as part of the site is within Source Protection Zone 1; • recreation as the site contains a PRoW and is adjacent to a number of additional PRoWs; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site was also considered to have an overall moderate-high landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction. HCC Highways has not provided any comments as no information was submitted with the call for sites in relation to the proposed access points or HGV routing.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 51 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
MLPCS007 is in close proximity to MLPCS015. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect against SA objective 2.1 (heritage) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 4.1 (water), 9.2 (recreation) and 3.1 (landscape). In addition, a significant positive effect is identified against SA objective 6.2 (flood alleviation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS008 Hatfield – Furze Welwyn 532,000 The site scored well during the site assessment. The Field Hatfield development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond.
However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• sensitive land uses as a number of residential properties lie within 100m of the site; • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and • sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as it not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 52 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS008 is in close proximity to MLPCS001, MLPCS005, MLPCS006 and MLPCS009. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The cumulative effects would be greater with regard to sites MLPCS001 and MLPCS009 as they are much closer than sites MLPCS005 and MLPCS006. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 9.4 (aerodrome safety), 9.2 (recreation loss), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS009 Hatfield Quarry – Welwyn 6.6 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Land adjoining Hatfield development of the site is considered likely to have a positive
Coopers Green effect on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering Lane pond and BAP priority species or habitats as the proposed restoration includes the creation of wetland. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains a watercourse and is adjacent to an additional watercourse; • recreation as the site contains two PRoWs and is adjacent to two designated areas of open space; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 53 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site is considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS009 is in close proximity to MLPCS001, MLPCS005, MLPCS006 and MLPCS008. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The cumulative effects would be greater with regard to sites MLPCS001 and MLPCS008 as they are much closer than sites MLPCS005 and MLPCS006. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety) and a significant negative effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS010 The Briggens East 10.7 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Estate Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and BAP priority species or habitats as the proposed restoration includes the allocation of land for nature conservation purposes. However, it is considered that the development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to one area of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 54 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
ancient woodland; • the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains a watercourse and a number of small water bodies; • recreation as the site contains two PRoWs; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objectives 4.1 (water) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (heritage), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS011 Water Hall Quarry East 956,000 The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The – Farm Fields Hertfordshire development site is considered likely to have a positive impact Area on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and BAP priority species or habitats as the proposed restoration includes the creation of two lakes separated by wetland and additional wildlife habitat. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains one watercourse and is adjacent to another watercourse;
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 55 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
• recreation as the site is adjacent to a PRoW and within close proximity of three additional PRoW;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity of the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity of the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0011 is in close proximity to MLPCS012, MLPCS014, MLPCS016, MLPCS017, MLPCS018 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation) and significant negative effects against 1.1 (biodiversity). In addition, the SA identifies a significant positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 6.2 (flood alleviation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS012 Water Hall Quarry East 450,000 The site scored well during the site assessment. The – Broad Green Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have a positive Area impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 56 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• sensitive land uses as the site is immediately adjacent to a number of residential properties;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity of the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity of the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0012 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS014, MLPCS016, MLPCS017, MLPCS018 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and a significant adverse effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection). In addition, a minor positive effect is recorded in relation to SA objective 9.3 (recreation provision). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 57 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
MLPCS014 Water Hall Quarry East 1 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The – Bunkers Hill Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have positive South Area impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to one area of ancient woodland;
• recreation as the site is adjacent to one PRoW; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity of the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0014 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS012, MLPCS016, MLPCS017, MLPCS018 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise).
The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 58 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
against SA objectives 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 landscape) and 9.2 (recreation loss) and a significant negative effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS015 Plashes Farm East 500,000 The site scored less well during the site assessment than other Hertfordshire sites because it is considered that development of the site could have a very high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site contains three areas and is adjacent to three additional areas of ancient woodland; and
• international and national ecological designations as the site is adjacent to Plashes Wood SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest). The site is also considered likely to have a high impact on:
• recreation as the site contains three PRoW; • sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to Plashes Farm;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity of the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. The site is considered to have an overall moderate-high landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 59 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS015 is in close proximity to MLPCS007. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 3.1 (landscape) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS016 Water Hall Quarry East 1.7 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The – Howe Green Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have a positive Area impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains one watercourse which also runs down its eastern boundary;
• recreation as the site contains two PRoW and is within close proximity of an additional PRoW;
• sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to residential properties;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 60 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity of the strategic road network.
The site is considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has not assessed the site as no details of access arrangements were submitted with the call for sites submission. If access is proposed from Robin Nest Hill it is anticipated that improvements will be required to accommodate mineral excavation at the site. MLPCS0016 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS012, MLPCS014, MLPCS017, MLPCS018 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise).
The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS017 Robins Nest Hill East 1 million The site scored very well during the site assessment as it is Hertfordshire considered that development of the site is only likely have a high impact on:
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway;
• sustainable transport and pollution to the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 61 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The development of the site is also considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. The site is considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0017 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS012, MLPCS014, MLPCS016, MLPCS018 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect against SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant adverse effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection). In addition, the SA identifies a minor positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 9.3 (recreation provision). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS018 Southfield Wood East 500,000 The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The East Hertfordshire development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• ancient woodland as the site is adjacent to one area of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 62 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
ancient woodland;
• recreation as the site contains two PRoW; and • sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity of the rail network or a navigable waterway. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0018 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS012, MLPCS014, MLPCS016, MLPCS017 and MLPCS019. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect against SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (historic environment) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS019 Pipers End East 1.4 million The site scored reasonably well during the site assessment. The Hertfordshire development of site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. However, it is considered that development of the site could have a high impact on:
• the ecological status of water bodies as the site contains two watercourses and is adjacent to two additional
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 63 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes)
watercourses;
• sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. MLPCS0019 is in close proximity to MLPCS011, MLPCS012, MLPCS014, MLPCS016, MLPCS017 and MLPCS018. As such, if the sites were to come forward for extraction at the same time or immediately after one another there is potential for cumulative adverse effects (additive or temporal effects respectively) with regard to transport (e.g. vehicular movements and emissions) and the amenity of sensitive receptors (e.g. air quality, noise). The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant adverse effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 64 March 2017 Table 6.5: Summary of the potential effects of the brick clay sites
Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes/m3)
MLPCS013 Harry’s Field Dacorum 140,000 tonnes The site scored well during the site assessment. The development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond and local wildlife sites and BAP priority species or habitats as the proposed restoration includes ecological restoration. However, it is considered that the development of the site could have a high impact on:
• sensitive land uses as the site is adjacent to a number of residential properties;
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or a navigable waterway; and
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The site is considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against SA objective 2.1 (heritage) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant adverse effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
MLPCS020 Roundhill Wood Dacorum 15,000m3 The site scored less well during the site assessment than other sites because it is considered that development of the site could have a very high impact on:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 65 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes/m3)
• ancient woodland as the site contains Roundhill Wood Ancient Woodland.
• landscape designations as the site is entirely located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty The site is also considered likely to have a high impact on:
• aquifers as the site is located on a principal aquifer. • ecological status of water bodies as the site contains a number of small water bodies.
• Local Nature Reserves and Local Wildlife Sites as the site lies entirely within a Local Wildlife Site.
• recreation as the site contains four PRoW. • sensitive land uses as the site is located immediately adjacent to a number of residential properties.
• sustainable transport as the site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
• sustainable transport and pollution to the environment as the site is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network. The development of the site is considered likely to have a positive impact on flood risk as any proposal may include a dewatering pond. The site is also considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment.
The SA of this site option identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 3.1 (landscape), 8.4
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 66 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes/m3)
(agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation loss). In addition, minor negative effects are identified against SA objectives 2.1 (historic environment), 4.1 (water quality), 7.1 (recycling) and 9.1 (health and well being). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
1 Land close to the Welwyn N/A Development within this Preferred Area could have a high existing Hatfield Hatfield impact on: Quarry • Ecological status of water bodies as there are a number of water bodies adjacent to the Preferred Area.
• Recreation as the Preferred Area is part of Ellenbrook Fields, which is an area of recreational green space.
• Sustainable transport as the Preferred Area is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network. The site is also considered to have an overall low-moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment.
The SA of this Preferred Area identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Minor negative effects were identified against SA objectives 2.1 (historic environment), 7.1 (recycling), 8.4 (agricultural land), 9.1 (health and wellbeing) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety). Positive or neutral effects were recorded against all other SA objectives, with the exception of SA objective 5.2 (energy efficiency), to which effects were uncertain. Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 67 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes/m3)
the site selection study assessment summarised above.
2 Land to the north East N/A Development within this Preferred Area could have a very high of the existing Hertfordshire impact on: Rickneys Quarry • Ancient Woodland as there are two areas of replanted ancient woodland within the Preferred Area and further areas of ancient woodland adjacent to the Preferred Area. The site is also considered likely to have a high impact on:
• Groundwater vulnerability as part of the site lies within SPZ 1.
• Recreation as several PRoW cross the Preferred Area.
• Sustainable transport as this Preferred Area is distant from the rail network and the navigable waterway network. The site is also considered to have an overall moderate landscape and visual sensitivity to mineral extraction and HCC Highways has raised some concerns which could be overcome following further information/ assessment. The SA of this Preferred Area identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (historic environment), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Minor negative effects were identified against SA objectives 7.1 (recycling), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.1 (health and wellbeing). Positive or neutral effects were recorded against all other SA objectives, with the exception of SA objective 5.2 (energy efficiency), to which effects were uncertain. Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 68 March 2017 Site ID Site Name District(s) Proposed Summary of potential effects if site developed for mineral mineral reserve extraction (tonnes/m3)
Note that restoration details are not available for this Preferred Area.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 69 March 2017 Table 6.6: Proposed sites and preferred areas ranked in terms of their potential impact on the site and surrounding environment
and National
ransport andransport
ID Ranking Site 2 Sieve Safeguarding ZonesAirport Woodland Ancient Aquifers or Habitats Species Priority BAP BMV Land Cumulative Effects of Water BodiesEcological Status Flood Risk Geodiversity Belt Green Vulnerability Groundwater Designations Heritage International Ecological Designations Land Ownership Designations Landscape Nature Reserves LocalLocal and Wildlife Sites of residential allocated Proximity development or built Recreation Restoration Uses Land Sensitive Sustainable transport Sustainable t the environmentto pollution Assessment and Visual Landscape HCC Highways Assessment
Sieve 3 Assessment Criteria
Sand and Gravel Sites
1 MLPCS004 Low- Low Low Medium Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low High Low Low Low Low Positive Medium Medium Low Medium High Low Green Moderate
2 MLPCS012 Low- Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium Low Low High High High Amber Moderate
3 MLPCS017 Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Medium High High Moderate Amber
4 MLPCS008 Low- Medium Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High High High Amber Moderate
5 Preferred Low- Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low High Low Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low Medium High Low Grey Area 1 Moderate
6 MLPCS006 Low- Medium Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Positive Medium High Low High High Low Amber Moderate
7 MLPCS009 Medium Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High Low Moderate Amber
8 MLPCS018 Low- Low High Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low Medium High Medium Amber Moderate
9 Preferred Very Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low High Medium Low Medium Low Medium Low High Low Medium High Medium Moderate Medium Area 2 High
10 MLPCS002 Low- Low Low Medium Low Medium Low High Positive Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High Medium Red Moderate
11 MLPCS011 Low- Low Low Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Low High Low Medium High High Amber Moderate
12 MLPCS019 Low Low Medium Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Low High High High Moderate Amber
13 MLPCS003 Low- Low High Medium Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low High Low Low Low Low Positive Medium High Low High High High Amber Moderate
14 MLPCS010 Low- Low High Medium Positive Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium High Low High High Low Red Moderate
Hertfor dshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 70 March 2017
and National
ransport andransport
ID Ranking Site 2 Sieve Safeguarding ZonesAirport Woodland Ancient Aquifers or Habitats Species Priority BAP BMV Land Cumulative Effects of Water BodiesEcological Status Flood Risk Geodiversity Belt Green Vulnerability Groundwater Designations Heritage International Ecological Designations Land Ownership Designations Landscape Nature Reserves LocalLocal and Wildlife Sites of residential allocated Proximity development or built Recreation Restoration Uses Land Sensitive Sustainable transport Sustainable t the environmentto pollution Assessment and Visual Landscape HCC Highways Assessment
15 MLPCS014 Low- Low High Medium Low Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Low High High High Amber Moderate
16 MLPCS016 Low Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Medium High Medium High High High Moderate Grey
17 MLPCS005 Mediu Moderate 16 Medium High Medium Low Medium Low Low Positive Low Medium Low Low Low Low Medium Low High Low Medium High High Red m -High
18 MLPCS007 Moderate Low High Medium Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low High Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low High High Medium Grey -High
19 MLPCS001 Mediu Very Moderate Medium High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Positive Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium High Low High High Medium Red m High -High
20 MLPCS015 Very Very Moderate Low Medium Medium Medium Low Medium Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Low High Low High High High Amber High High -High
Brick Clay Sites
1 MLPCS013 Low- Low Low Low Positive Medium Low Low Positive Low Low Medium Medium Low Medium Low Positive Low Medium Low High High High Amber Moderate
2 MLPCS020 Very Very Low High Medium Medium Low High Positive Low Low Medium Low Low Medium High Low High Low High High High Moderate Amber High High
* Sites have been ranked 1-20 for the sand and gravel sites and 1-2 for the brick clay sites and sand and gravel Preferred Options, with 1 being the site with the least high impacts and 18 or 2 being the site with the highest impacts.
16 Site MLPCS005 has since been withdrawn and therefore has not been recommended as a potential site for inclusion in the Plan.
Hertfor dshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 71 March 2017 7 Conclusions
7.1 This section summarises the conclusions of the Site Selection Study, highlighting which of the 18 sand and gravel site options, two sand and gravel preferred areas and two brick clay site options are likely to be the most appropriate for allocation in the Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan.
7.2 All 20 site options and two preferred areas have been subjected to Sieves 1, 2 and 3 of the site selection assessment as well as separate landscape and visual sensitivity and highways assessments. Site MLPCS005 has been withdrawn and so is not recommended for allocation in the Plan. However, in order to provide a comprehensive picture of the full range of site options, site MLPCS005 has been included within the site selection assessment.
7.3 Figure 7.1 illustrates the ranking of sites outlined in Table 6.6 above according to their potential impact on the site and surrounding environment.
Sand and gravel site options
7.4 Of the 18 sand and gravel sites and two sand and gravel preferred areas, site option MLPCS004 Pynesfield stands out as the least constrained option. MLPCS004 is considered to have potential to have high impacts on only two Sieve 3 assessment criteria (groundwater and sustainable transport) and scores ‘low-moderate’ and ‘green’ in the landscape and visual sensitivity assessment and highways assessments respectively. MLPCS004 is a relatively small site option located at the southern tip of the County close to the M25 and M40 motorways, directly adjacent to the London Borough of Hillingdon and South Buckinghamshire District.
7.5 Six sand and gravel site options and the two sand and gravel preferred areas have only three or four ‘red’ scores indicating a modest range of high impacts across the assessment criteria and therefore potential suitability for allocation. Starting with the least constrained, these are:
• MLPCS012 Broad Green has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria: sensitive land uses, sustainable transport and transport related pollution.
• MLPCS017 Robins Nest Hill has potential for high impacts against two Sieve 3 assessment criteria ‘sustainable transport’ and ‘transport related pollution’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
• MLPCS008 Furze Field has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria: sensitive land uses, sustainable transport and transport related pollution.
• Preferred Area 1 has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria: Ecological status of water bodies, recreation and sustainable transport.
• MLPCS006 Hatfield Aerodrome has potential for high impacts against four Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ecological status of water bodies, recreation, sustainable transport and transport related pollution.
• MLPCS009 Land adjoining Coopers Green Lane has potential for high impacts against four Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ecological status of water bodies, recreation, sensitive land uses and sustainable transport.
• MLPCS018 Southfield Wood has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria, ancient woodland, ‘recreation’ and ‘sustainable transport’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
• Preferred Area 2 has potential for very high impacts against one Sieve 3 assessment criterion: Ancient Woodland. This Preferred Area also has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria: Groundwater vulnerability, recreation and sustainable transport.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 72 March 2017 7.6 These six sand and gravel site options and two preferred areas are all located to the north, east and west of Hatfield in the centre of the County in close proximity to the A414 which runs through the middle of the County connecting the sites to Hatfield, Hertford, Hemel Hempstead, St Albans and Welwyn Garden City.
7.7 Seven sand and gravel site options have five and six ‘red’ scores indicating a moderate range of high impacts across the assessment criteria and lower potential suitability for allocation. Starting with the least constrained, these are:
• MLPCS002 Land at Salisbury Hall has potential for high impacts against four Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ecological status of water bodies, recreation, sensitive land uses, and sustainable transport. In addition, HCC’s Highways impact assessment identified potential for the site to have high impacts on the local highway network.
• MLPCS011 Farm Fields has potential for high impacts against four Sieve 3 assessment criteria ‘ecological status of water bodies’, ‘recreation’, ‘sustainable transport’ and ‘transport related pollution’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
• MLPCS019 Pipers End has potential for high impacts against four Sieve 3 assessment criteria, ‘ecological status of water bodies’, ‘sensitive land uses’, ‘sustainable transport’ and ‘transport related pollution’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
• MLPCS003 Land at Ware Park has potential for high impacts against six Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ancient woodland, groundwater vulnerability, recreation, sensitive land uses, sustainable transport and transport related pollution.
• MLPCS010 Briggens Estate has potential for high impacts against five Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ancient woodland, ecological status of water bodies, recreation, sensitive land uses and sustainable transport. In addition, HCC’s Highways impact assessment identified potential for the site to have high impacts on the local highway network.
• MLPCS014 Bunkers Hill South has potential for high impacts against five Sieve 3 assessment criteria, ‘ancient woodland’, ‘recreation’, ‘sensitive land uses’, ‘sustainable transport’ and ‘transport related pollution’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
• MLPCS016 Howe Green has potential for high impacts against five Sieve 3 assessment criteria, ‘ecological status of waterbodies’, ‘recreation’, ‘sensitive land uses’, ‘sustainable transport’ and ‘transport related pollution’, and scored ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment.
7.8 These seven site options are all located to the east and west of Hatfield and to the north and east of Hertford in the centre of the County. Again these sites are in close proximity to the A414 which runs through the middle of the County connecting the sites to Hatfield, Hertford, Hemel Hempstead, St Albans and Welwyn Garden City.
7.9 The remaining four sand and gravel site options (MLPCS001 Cromer Hyde Farm, MLPCS005 Nashe’s and Fairfold’s Farm, MLPCS007 Barwick and MLPCS015 Plashes Farm) have over seven ‘red’ scores suggesting that these sites offer the least potential as sand and gravel site allocations. Sites MLPCS001 and MLPCS005 lie to the north west of Hatfield, whereas sites MLPCS007 and MLPCS015 represent the most north eastern site options. Site MLPCS001 has the potential for very high impacts on heritage designations within close proximity to the site. Site MLPCS015 has potential for very high impacts on the pockets of ancient woodland it contains. Furthermore, all four options lie within close proximity to sensitive land uses and have the potential for high impacts on the local recreation resource, sustainable transport network and landscape.
7.10 There is some uncertainty attached to the suitability of the relatively unconstrained sand and gravel site options MLPCS017 and MLPCS018, moderately constrained sites MLPCS011 and MLPCS019 and highly constrained sites MLPCS001, MLPCS005, MLPCS007, MLPCS014, MLPCS015 and MLPCS016. These ten sites all score ‘red’ in the Sieve 2 assessment due to a lack of information to conclusively determine their economic viability and deliverability. This uncertainty should be resolved before any of these site options are allocated within the Minerals Local Plan.
7.11 Overall, the sand and gravel site options and preferred areas that score between one and four ‘red’ scores (i.e. MLPCS004, MLPCS012, MLPCS017, MLPCS008, MLPCS006, MLPCS009 and MLPCS018) are likely to have the greatest potential to mitigate the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 73 March 2017 adverse impacts associated with their excavation and operation and are therefore considered to be the most appropriate site options for allocation in the Minerals Local Plan. As Preferred Area 1 and 2 also score between one and four ‘red’ scores, these areas could be considered as continuing preferred areas.
Brick clay site options
7.12 The two brick clay site options lie close to the western edge of the County bordering Buckinghamshire. Site option MLPCS013, to the east of Chesham scores considerably better than site option MLPCS020 which lies further to the north west to the west of Berkhamsted:
• MLPCS013 has potential for high impacts against three Sieve 3 assessment criteria: sensitive land uses, sustainable transport and transport related pollution.
• MLPCS020 has potential for high impacts against nine Sieve 3 assessment criteria: ancient woodland, aquifers, ecological status of water bodies, landscape, Local Nature Reserves and Local Wildlife Sites, recreation, sensitive land uses, sustainable transport and transport related pollution. There is potential for very high impacts on the ancient woodland that sits within the site and the wider landscape.
7.13 Therefore, brick clay site MLPCS013 represents the most appropriate site option for allocation in the Minerals Local Plan.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 74 March 2017 Hertfordshire Mineral Stevenage District Local Plan Review
Luton North Hertfordshire District Figure 7.1: Site ranking based Central MLPCS015 on the range and severity of East Bedfordshire likely adverse effects generated Hertfordshire District by each site MLPCS007
Aylesbury Hertfordshire County boundary Vale District District boundary Preferred Area No. 2 Number of red scores for each MLPCS003 site [1][2]
Less than or equal to 3 MLPCS010 MLPCS001 4 - 6
MLPCS018 greater than or equal to 7 MLPCS009 MLPCS019 MLPCS008 MLPCS011 MLPCS005 St. Albans MLPCS012 [1] Sites MLPCS013 and MLPCS020 are MLPCS016 District Preferred MLPCS014 brick clay sites; the remaining 18 sites Dacorum Area No. 1 and the two preferred areas are sand MLPCS020 District MLPCS017 and gravel sites MLPCS006 Welwyn [2] Prefered Areas are depicted in the Hatfield District map with green outlines Broxbourne District MLPCS002
MLPCS013 Epping Forest District
Watford Hertsmere District District Chiltern District Enfield Three Rivers District
MLPCS013 Barnet
MLPCS004
Harrow Waltham Forest Haringey
Hillingdon South Bucks Map Scale @ A3: 1:155,000 District
Brent Islington Hackney Camden 0 5 10 E km Ealing Newham Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 OS EUL 100019606 CB:Goosen_V EB:Goosen_V LUCLON 6315_Fig7-1_MLP_Site_rank_A3L 16/02/2017 Source: LUC Appendix 1 Site and Preferred Area Proforma
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 76 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS001
Site Information
Site Name: Land at Cromer Hyde Farm Site ID Number: MLPCS001
Site Contact: Agent – Strutt and Site Visit Date 05/07/2016 - Afternoon Parker and Time:
Site Area: 103.6ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 211834 521084 Planning History: The site has no relevant Ref.: planning history.
District: Welwyn Hatfield
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 77 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within Resource Block F of IMAU report 69. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which shows the eastern part of site to be underlain by glacio-fluvial sand & gravel, concealed by overlying deposits in the western part of the site. The BGS superficial geology map shows the sand & gravel to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, and confirms that these are overlain in the western part of the site by an overburden of glacial till. The site falls within the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 13.
• Tonnage of Reserves 2.4mt Rough estimate, based only on six pre-existing Calculated? boreholes The estimated tonnage equates to 1.45 million m3, which implies an average thickness of 1.48m across the 98-hectare site. IMAU boreholes suggest mineral thickness of up to 10m in this area, averaging 5.4m across IMAU Block F, but highly variable.
• Economic Viability No Infrastructure in place for adjoining site to the Assessed by Proposer? south.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed No impacts expected, but this is simply an for Mitigation? for assumption based on the fact that the adjoining land has been worked. It does not consider
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 78 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
what mitigation may have been needed there. But it may be reasonable to assume similar requirements would apply and therefore likely to be affordable.
• Deliverability: operator Not known No operator involvement willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposed by landowner’s agent willing? Available within 1-5 years
• Other points to note: Adjoins Hatfield Quarry Adjoining land to south has been worked for sand & gravel
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support the proposed Information allocation. Limited evidence has been provided of economic viability and impact mitigation, and there has been no operator involvement as yet.
Suitability for No. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The site is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is located immediately adjacent to two areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The site contains a small area of deciduous woodland and is located within close proximity to a number of other deciduous woodlands (one immediately adjacent to the site).
BMV land Medium The site is located within Grade 2 and 3 agricultural land, approximately 70% and 30% of the site respectively.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 79 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Medium The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, due to the openness of the site the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 80% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 20% not located within Source Protection Zone.
Heritage designations Very High The site is partly located within Brocket Hall Registered Park and Garden and is immediately adjacent to four Grade II listed buildings.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is currently not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is located immediately adjacent Local Wildlife Sites Benstead’s Wood and Long Spring and Long Grove Plantation Local Wildlife Sites.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Cromer Hyde and approximately 30m to the south of Lemsford. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of the Welwyn Hatfield District Local Plan 2005. However, it is immediately adjacent to proposed site allocation SDS6 and approximately 100m to the north of proposed site allocation SDS5 within Welwyn Hatfield’s
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 80 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Proposed Submission Local Plan (August 2016).
Recreation High The site contains a PRoW and is immediately adjacent to a number of other PRoWs. Brocket Park Golf Course is also located to the north of the site.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Cromer Hyde, Gosmoor and a property which is located on the access to Cromer Hyde Farm. Lemsford is also located approximately 30m north of the site.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Medium The site is located within close proximity to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (A1 and A414) and is (dust, air, water) not located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal17
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies significant negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (air pollution of ecological sites), 2.1 (cultural heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). This assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments18
The site is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the openness of the site and open views from residential properties adjacent to the site that cannot be mitigated by screen planting without blocking the open views across the wider landscape currently enjoyed by those residents. Mineral workings are likely to be seen by people using the footpath crossing the site. The site is open, particularly to the south and mineral extraction is likely to degrade some valued features, such as the ancient woodland contained within the site and potential severance of the visual link along the lime avenue between Benstead’s Wood and Brocket Hall. Although the ancient woodland could be left untouched, extraction could not be screened without changing the characteristic large scale openness of the area and interrupting the visual link along the lime avenue between Benstead’s Wood and Brocket Hall. There may be opportunities to improve degraded hedgerows as part of any mitigation scheme.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments19 Score:
17 For the full assessment please see LUC (2016) Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal 18 For the full assessment please see LUC (2016) Hertfordshire Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Study of Potential Mineral Sites 19 HCC Highways’ detailed comments can be found in Appendix 2
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 81 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
The site is considered to raise significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. Over the last five years there have been a total of 12 collisions resulting in slight injuries on Marford Road. Five of these collisions occurred at the intersection of Marford Road and Green Lanes. This indicates there may be existing safety issues at this junction. There have been four collisions on Green Lanes directly adjacent to the site, two of which resulted in slight injuries and two of which resulted in serious injuries. There is a school and church located to east in Lemsford Village. More information is required on the proposed routing of HGV vehicles to assess whether there will be any safety implications for these existing land uses. Detailed analysis and suggested mitigation measures will need to accompany a planning application, in addition to a site specific Transport Assessment.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 82 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS002
Site Information
Site Name: Land at Salisbury Hall Site ID Number: MLPCS002
Site Contact: Landowner and Operator – Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 - Afternoon Tarmac Aggregates and Time:
Site Area: 14.4ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 203102 519392 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: Hertsmere
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 83 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within Resource Block D of IMAU Report 71. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which shows the whole site to be within an area of ‘concealed glacio-fluvial deposits’.
The BGS superficial geology map shows these to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which is not overlain (concealed) by other deposits. The site lies at the feather-edge of the resource and is thus likely to be thinner towards the south-east.
• Tonnage of Reserves 860,000t Tonnage is based on drilling and testing by the Calculated? operator. The figure equates to 537,500 m3, which implies an average thickness of 5.1m across the 10.6-hectare area of working. Nearest IMAU borehole suggests 6.8m of mineral below 3.9 m of overburden.
• Economic Viability Yes Informed by borehole investigation & proposal to Assessed by Proposer? work as a satellite site to Tyttenhanger.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Dust and water impacts would be mitigated. for Mitigation?
• Deliverability: operator Yes Proposed by operator. willing?
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 84 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Operator is landowner. willing? Available within 11-15 years.
• Other points to note: Annual output indicated as 500,000 tonnes, so it would be a very short-lived site (2 years proposed), but this is entirely feasible, as mineral would be processed at Tyttenhanger Quarry.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within in close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary A aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium Approximately 95% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land with the remaining 5% located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains a small water body within its bodies centre.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 85 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification
mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Low The site is not located with a Source Protection Zone.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located approximately 120m to the residential or built development south of London Colney and 520m to the east of Old Cottages. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of the proposed Hertsmere Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan (November 2016).
Recreation High The site contains a PRoW (No: 027) and is immediately adjacent to a number of other PRoWs (No: 013 and 042). The Watford Football Club Training Ground is located immediately to the west of the site.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The Watford Football Club Training Ground is located immediately to the west of the site and the Salisbury Hall and other residential properties are located immediately to the south of the site. The Salisbury Lodge Cattery is also located immediately adjacent to the site.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 86 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification
the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Medium The site is located within close proximity to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (M25 and A1081) but is (dust, air, water) not located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 4.1 (water quality), 2.1 (cultural heritage) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objective 9.2 (recreation). Therefore this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the lack of valued features and proximity to existing built development and the ability to mitigate impacts which could be achieved through screening. Restoration proposals could also strengthen the existing degraded landscape pattern and hedgerow structure. There are also a limited number of residential properties in the vicinity of the site, of which only two properties along Bell Lane have open views. The impacts of mineral extraction could be mitigated by screening without losing existing visual amenity. Mineral extraction on the site is likely to affect a small number of people using the footpath across the site.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to raise significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the A1087/B556 junction as having existing capacity problems. It is suggested by the site promoter that HGV transportation would use the B556 and A414 meaning that all HGV movements would be directed through the A1087/B556 roundabout which serves all the vehicles entering and exiting the Colney Fields Shopping Park. Detailed analysis and suggested mitigation measures will need to accompany a planning application, in addition to a site specific Transport Assessment.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 87 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS003
Site Information
Site Name: Land at Ware Park Site ID Number: MLPCS003
Site Contact: Agent – D. K. Symes Site Visit Date 29/06/16 – Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 35.5ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 5325 2150 Planning History: Two mineral planning Ref.: applications were submitted in 1990 District: East Hertfordshire (3/0959-90) and 1995 (3/1653-95) both of which were withdrawn. The site is currently being considered for mineral extraction under planning application 3/0770-16.
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 88 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes (mostly) Much of the site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 112, but part of it falls outside that area and has no mineral. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which identifies the resource as ‘glacio fluvial deposits’ which are shown as being concealed within the northern part of the site. The BGS superficial geology map shows the deposits to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are not overlain (concealed) by other deposits (but which are absent in the eastern part of the site). The majority of site forms part of adopted MLP 2007 Preferred Area 2 and within the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 11.
• Tonnage of Reserves 2.6mt Borehole data has been provided to support the Calculated? reserve calculation. The estimated tonnage equates to 1.625 million m3, which implies an average worked thickness of 6.5m across the 25-hectare area of working. IMAU boreholes indicate up to 10.3m of mineral but highly variable.
• Economic Viability Yes Evidenced by details contained within the Assessed by Proposer? planning application and Environmental Statement.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 89 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Evidenced by details contained within the for Mitigation? Environmental Statement.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Ingrebourne Valley Limited (site restoration willing? company which also extracts aggregates).
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposed by Agent on behalf of landowner. willing? Available within 1-5 years.
• Other points to note: PP applied for (3/0770-16). Proposed to extract 200,000 – 250,000tpa. High risk of sterilisation by urban expansion if not extracted very soon.
Adequacy of Supporting Information (including that contained within the planning Information application and environmental statement) is adequate to support the proposal.
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is located immediately adjacent to one area of ancient woodland. A second area of ancient woodland is located to the south of the site on the opposite side of Sacombe Road. However, the restoration of the site proposes woodland and a small area of wetland which could have positive effects on ecological connectivity of the woodland. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary A aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site is located immediately adjacent to two BAP habitats and a third BAP habitat is located to the south of the site on the opposite side of Sacombe Road.
The restoration of the site proposes woodland and a small area of wetland which could have
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 90 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
positive effects on nature conservation and BAP priority species and/or habitats. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
BMV land Medium The whole of the site is located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites. Rickney’s Quarry is located in close proximity; however, this site has been mothballed and is no longer in operation.
Ecological status of water Low The site is not located near to a water body. bodies
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability High Approximately 45% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 1, 20% within Source Protection Zone 2 and 35% within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a mineral operator.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 91 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Positive The site is located on the opposite side of the Local Wildlife Sites road to the Waterford Heath Local Nature Reserve and immediately adjacent a Local Wildlife Site (Rickney’s Quarry) with records of at least one Hertfordshire Red List butterfly species with evidence that the site is suitable to maintain breeding populations. The site is also immediately adjacent to St. Johns Wood (Rickneys Quarry) Local Wildlife Site. However, the restoration of the site proposes woodland and a small area of wetland which could have positive effects on nature conservation. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately to the north of residential or built development Hertford and approximately 400m to the east of Waterford, 680m south of Crouchfield and 700m west of Ware Park. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of the East Herts Local Plan 2007. However, consultation on a new pre-submission version of the Plan took place between November and December 2016. This version of the Plan includes Draft Policy Hert4 – a preferred residential development in close proximity to the site.
Recreation High The site contains a PRoW (no: 001) in the central eastern area of the site and there are others adjacent to the site including 013 and 003 to the north, 013 to the east and 009 to the south. The site is also located on the opposite side of the road to the Waterford Heath Local Nature Reserve.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use, woodland and a small area of wetland.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately to the north of Hertford and a number of properties along Sacombe Road. The site is also located approximately 70m to the west of a property along Wadesmill Road.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 92 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 3.1 (landscape) and 9.1 (health & amenity) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 4.1 (Water), 9.2 (recreation) and 1.3 (air pollution of ecological sites). This assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction as the site is largely enclosed although its openness to the east could result in an adverse impact on the unified rural character of the wider river valley. That said, impacts could be mitigated by screening and extraction operations being set back from the ancient woodland. Residential properties are located to the south, however, views of the site are screened. Properties along Sacombe Road and from the footpath along the western boundary would have views of the site but they could be mitigated through planting.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. The site promoter suggests access directly onto Wadesmill Road with all traffic to and from the north via the A602 – the majority of vehicle movements will be via A10/A602 junction. Wadesmill Road is a numbered classified secondary distributor road with a speed limit of 60mph and a 7.5 tonne weight limit. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application. The site is also under consideration for a mineral planning application (3/0770-16) and HCC Highways have provided comments requesting further details. HCC will assess the application further once the additional information has been submitted.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 93 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS004
Site Information
Site Name: Land at Pynesfield Site ID Number: MLPCS004
Site Contact: Agent – D. K. Symes Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 14.5ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 5035 1905 Planning The site has been subject to Ref.: History: two minerals planning application both of which District: Three Rivers were refused (8/0761-1320 and 8/1254-1521). The site is now the subject of an ongoing Appeal (Case ref: APP/M1900/W/16/3153814).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
20 Site refused due to sensitive principal aquifer; inappropriate inert infill given location in SPZ1; silt lagoon would be risk to quantity and quality of groundwater; and inappropriate development in the Green Belt. 21 Site refused due to its location outside the preferred area and the use of clay as the restoration material has a higher risk of impact of flooding (due to its lower permeability).
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 94 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within an area ‘not assessed’ on IMAU Report 12, but most (though not all) of the area is identified as a resource (‘river terrace deposits’) on the digital BGS Resource Map (and as Shepperton Gravel on the BGS superficial geology map).
• Tonnage of Reserves 300,000 to Borehole data provided – mineral thickness Calculated? 350,000t ranges from 2.6 to 7.7m. .The higher estimated tonnage equates to 218,750 m3, which implies an average worked thickness of 2.4m across the 9-hectare area of working (allowing for reduced extraction at margins of excavation). The mineral reserve lies principally beneath the water table. No relevant IMAU boreholes are available to compare with this indication.
• Economic Viability Yes Evidenced by planning application. The site Assessed by Proposer? would not be viable on its own but would be if worked in conjunction with the nearby quarry at Denham Park Farm. Note that restoration relies upon import of reclamation materials from Denham Park Farm quarry – but this has been allowed for and does not affect economic viability.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 95 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Evidenced by planning application. for Mitigation?
• Deliverability: operator Yes Ingrebourne / Harleyford Ltd. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposed by landowner’s Agent. Landowner is willing? part of Wm Boyer & Sons – a mineral operating company- and there is an agreement in place for the land to be worked for minerals. Available within 1 year. Needs to be extracted before sterilisation by HS2.
• Other points to note: PP applied for (8/1254-15) but refused. Proposed to extract 125,000 tonnes p.a.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes, although the planning application notes that the site will consideration as a Specific soon be sterilised by HS2, so the allocation would only be Site allocation, on resource worthwhile if the site can be worked very soon. grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary A aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species. The proposed restoration includes the creation of a wetland sustainable drainage scheme which could have positive effects on BAP priority species and/or habitats. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
BMV land Medium The whole of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 96 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites. However, Denham Park Farm, located in the neighbouring County of Buckinghamshire is in close proximity.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability High The whole of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 1.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Positive The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
The proposed restoration includes the creation of a wetland sustainable drainage scheme which could have positive effects on nature conservation. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 97 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
application stage.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located approximately 110m to the residential or built development south of West Hyde. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of the Three Rivers District Local Plan 2014.
Recreation Medium The site does not contain any PRoW, however, it is located within close proximity to a number of PRoWs (No’s: 002 and 004).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use and a wetland sustainable drainage scheme.
Sensitive land uses Medium The site is located approximately 85m to the west of a property along Old Uxbridge Road. However, it should be noted that the A412 separates the property from the site.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Low The site is located adjacent to the strategic pollution to the environment road network (A412) but is not located within (dust, air, water) or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 9.2 (recreation loss) and 3.1 (landscape). In addition, the SA identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection) and 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects). Therefore, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the lack of valued features and proximity to existing and potential transport infrastructure. The area is effectively screened by topography to the west and boundary vegetation to the south and east. Impacts could be fully mitigated through screening, particularly along Tilehouse Lane without adversely changing the character of the landscape. There are also very few properties in the vicinity of the site and none have open views of the site. Furthermore, there is no visibility from recreational routes or from the lakes in the Colne Valley.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The proposed site has no fundamental highway objection in principle.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 98 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Access to the site is from Tilehouse Lane which has a junction access to the A412. Tilehouse Lane is a rural access lane with narrow width and hedges either side. The A412 is known locally as the North Orbital Road and connects to the M40 and M25. HCC Highways commented on planning application 8/1254-15 (which was refused) and had no objection subject to conditions regarding vehicle restrictions, the impact of construction vehicles onto the local area and the agreement of a routing agreement being imposed. Mitigation measures identified in a site specific Transport Assessment may still be required though.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 99 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS005
Site Information
Site Name: Nashe’s and Fairfold’s Farm Site ID Number: MLPCS005
Site Contact: Agent – D. K. Symes Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 - Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 40.9ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 5185 2094 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: St. Albans
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 100 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes All but the north-west corner of the site falls within Resource Block C of IMAU Report 71. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which identifies the material as ‘concealed glacio-fluvial resources’. The BGS superficial geology map shows these to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup which are not overlain (concealed) by other deposits.
• Tonnage of Reserves 1.25mt No evidence of calculation of reserves. Estimated Calculated? tonnage equates to 781,250 m3, which implies an average thickness of 3.1m across the 25- hectare area of working.
IMAU Boreholes at edges of site show up to 13m of mineral below up to 2.6m of overburden.
• Economic Viability Partly Reserve is claimed to be large enough to be Assessed by Proposer? worked independently or as an extension to nearby Hatfield quarry. But no evidence to back this up.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Consideration appears to be limited to the for Mitigation? for examples given on form. Response to those to be achieved through site design. No other mitigation needs identified. This may be too simplistic – especially in view of the significance of the underlying Chalk aquifer, and needs to be supported by evidence. Additional monitoring/
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 101 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
mitigation costs might need to be allowed for.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Wm. Boyer & Sons Ltd. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Landowner is the operator. willing? Available within 1 – 5 years.
• Other points to note: Adjacent to Hatfield Quarry & Land at Suttons. Proposed to extract 150,000 – 200,000tpaover a period of about 10 years, or less.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support the proposed Information allocation. Limited evidence has been provided of environmental impact mitigation. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. Proposal has been withdrawn.
Suitability for Proposal has been withdrawn. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The site is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is located immediately adjacent to one area of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary Undifferentiated aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium The whole of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 102 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Medium The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, due to the open nature of the site the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The whole of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to Local Wildlife Sites Oak’s Wood and Hook’s Wood ancient woodland which are Local Wildlife Sites.
Proximity of allocated Low The site is not located within 250m of an residential or built development existing settlement nor is it located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of St. Albans District Local Plan 1994 or St. Albans draft Strategic Local Plan 2016.
Recreation High The site contains a PRoW (No: 020) and is immediately adjacent to a number of other PRoWs including No’s 054 and 186.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored principally back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses Medium The site is located on the opposite side of Nashe’s Farm Lane where two properties are located.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 103 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
The site is also located approximately 90m to the north of Oak Farm.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety). The SA identifies significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above. Site MLPCS005 has since been withdrawn and therefore has not been recommended as a potential site for inclusion in the plan.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to mineral extraction as the site has an open nature, is elevated above the surrounding landscape and the area has a tranquil rural character. That said, some impacts could be mitigated through screening and the landscape structure could be improved through restoration of the hedgerow network. The site is also visible to a large number of residents in the Jersey Farm area of St. Albans. Due to the rising topography of the site, these impacts cannot be fully mitigated.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to raise significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. The access is proposed either direct to House Lane or via the adjacent Hatfield Quarry. House Lane is a local distributor road subject to a 30mph speed limit and a weight restriction of 7.5 tonnes. House Lane is narrow and not suitable for HGV movements. More information is required for HCC Highways to assess the site including a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the routing of HGV movements). Additionally, information on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC Highways can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 104 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS006
Site Information
Site Name: Hatfield Aerodrome Site ID Number: MLPCS006
Site Contact: Agent – SLR Consulting Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 86.6ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 208269 519951 Planning Part of the site has been Ref.: History: subject to four mineral planning applications, two of District: St. Albans and Welwyn which were refused Hatfield (6/0299-7822 and 5/0620/7823) and two of which were withdrawn (6- 0221-81 and 5/0509-81). The site is currently being considered for mineral extraction under planning application 5/0394-16.
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
22 Site refused due to the land falling within an agricultural priority area – Grade 1 and Grade 2 in the Agricultural Land Classification. 23 No decision notice, although the decision for 6/0299-78 also refers to 5/0620-78.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 105 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas Yes A small wedge along the northern boundary of the site has been worked. However, as it’s so small it is not considered to be a constraint to the extraction of mineral from this site.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The eastern side of the site falls within Resource Block A of IMAU Report 67, whilst the western side falls within Resource Block C of IMAU Report 71 (effectively a continuation of the same resource). This is confirmed by the digital BGS resource map which shows virtually the whole of the site to be within an area of ‘concealed glacio-fluvial deposits’, overlain (along a former watercourse) by ‘sub-alluvial river terrace deposits’. The BGS superficial geology map indicates the main, lower resource to be part of the pre- glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, overlain (‘concealed’) in this area by glacial till. The site falls within the Adopted MLP 2007 Preferred Area 1 and the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 15.
• Tonnage of Reserves 8mt No calculations supplied – but borehole logs are Calculated? provided in Appendix 6-1 of the Environmental Statement, confirming two layers of sand & gravel with intervening layer of clayey interburden.
The estimated tonnage equates to 5.0 million
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 106 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
m3, which implies an average worked thickness of 10.0 m across the 50-hectare area of working.
This may be optimistic given that IMAU Boreholes indicate 6.7 to 9.5 m of glacio-fluvial sand & gravel below 0.6 to 5.4m of overburden (glacial till). Most of the reserve lies below the water table.
• Economic Viability Yes Evidenced by planning application. Restoration Assessed by Proposer? dependent on import of inert waste, but this is allowed for.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Evidenced by planning application. for Mitigation?
• Deliverability: operator Yes Brett Aggregates. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Operator has an option to lease the land. willing? Available within 1 – 15+ years.
• Other points to note: Currently an allocated site in the 2007 MLP. PP applied for (5/0394-16). Proposed to extract approx. 250,000 tpa over 30 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The site is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site contains deciduous woodland and additional habitats.
However, the proposed restoration includes
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 107 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
the creation of grassland and wetland which could have positive effects on BAP priority habitats and/ or species. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
BMV land Medium Approximately 70% of the site is located within Grade 2 and 15% is located within Grade 3 agricultural land. The remaining 15% is located within non-agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains two watercourses. bodies
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Risk Zones 3a or 3b. It is however located within Flood Risk Zone 2. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 60% of the site is located within a Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 40% located within Source Protection Zone 2.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to four Grade II listed buildings.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a mineral operator.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 108 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Positive The site is located immediately adjacent to the Local Wildlife Sites Home Covert and Round Wood Local Wildlife Site. However, the proposed restoration includes the creation of grassland and wetland which could have positive effects on nature conservation. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Hatfield and Smallford. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation of St. Albans District Local Plan 1994, St. Albans draft Strategic Local Plan 2016, the Welwyn Hatfield District Local Plan 2005 or the Welwyn Hatfield Proposed Submission Local Plan 2016.
Recreation High The site contains two PRoW (No’s:014 and 015) and is within close proximity of two additional PRoW (No’s: 012 and 062) and the Hertfordshire Sports Village. Furthermore, the site is used for informal recreation.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to a combination of nature conservation (creation of grassland and wetland) and public open space (country park).
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Hatfield, Smallford and Popefield Farm.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Low The site is located immediately adjacent to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (A1057) but is not (dust, air, water) located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 2.1 (heritage), 4.1 (Water) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety) and significant negative effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (Biodiversity and air quality), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). In
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 109 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
addition, the SA also identifies a minor positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 6.2 (flood alleviation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to its former industrial use. The area is flat and heavily screened and post-operation restoration could improve the existing landscape character. The boundary vegetation screens the site from the small number of properties within the vicinity of the site. Any impacts can be fully mitigated through screening without an adverse impact on visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. The site is currently subject to a minerals planning application (5/0394-16) and the site promoter has stated that the majority of HGV traffic would route to the east towards the A1(M). Access would be on to the A1057 and it is understood that a Road Safety Audit (RSA) is being undertaken. HCC Highways will provide further comment on the application once the RSA has been submitted and reviewed. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 110 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS007
Site Information
Site Name: Barwick Site ID Number: MLPCS007
Site Contact: Landowner Site Visit Date 29/06/2016 - Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 120.3 ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 218817 538112 Planning History: Part of the site has been Ref.: subject to a number of planning applications for District: East Hertfordshire mineral extraction. Four of which were refused (E- 2097-6624, E-1950-6425, E- 1572-7026 and E/2493- 6527), one of which was permitted (E/1387-56) and one of which was withdrawn (E/1531-60).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
24 Site refused due to its location forming an attractive feature of the Rib Valley; gravel extraction would destroy the hillside and land formation which subsequent tree planting would not restore; the gravel workings, plant and machinery could not effectively screened from view; the rural character of local roads and the character and setting of Barwick Ford would be adversely effected by their use, the gravel lorries and associated congestion; and there is insufficient evidence to show that there is a demand for this material which cannot be adequately met by other sources. 25 Same reasoning as application: E-2097-66. 26 Same reasoning as application: E-2097-66. 27 Same reasoning as application: E-2097-66.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 111 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Partly Some areas within the western and central parts of the site fall within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 112, whilst areas within the eastern part of the site fall within Resource Block C of the same report, with significant intervening areas of non-mineral. Note that the eastern areas are now excluded from the revised proposal. The resource areas are confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which shows these to be mostly glacio-fluvial deposits, concealed in places, and overlain by more recent ‘sub-alluvial river terrace deposits beneath the floodplain of the River Rib, which bisects the site from north to south. The more detailed BGS superficial geology map confirms the lower resource to be glacio-fluvial sand & gravel which is overlain in places and interbedded in others with glacial till deposits. Areas of non-mineral largely correspond to deposits of glacio-lacustrine clay and silt. The site falls partly within the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 9.
• Tonnage of Reserves Estimated at No boreholes have been drilled, reserve estimate Calculated? 5mt is based only on applicant’s experience. IMAU boreholes in western part indicate up to 6.4 m of glacio-fluvial sand & gravel beneath up to 10.6m of overburden (glacial till).
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 112 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
IMAU boreholes in eastern part indicate much thicker deposits (8.4 to 11.6m of sand & gravel beneath much thinner or no overburden), but those resources are now excluded from the new boundary.
• Economic Viability No Very limited consideration has been given – no Assessed by Proposer? details of resource assessment and no operator involvement, although restoration would not be dependent on landfilling.
• Economic Viability Allows No No impacts anticipated but no studies yet done. for Mitigation? Original form states only that studies and advice from an aggregates operator would be required.
• Deliverability: operator Not known No operator yet involved. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposed by landowner’s employee. willing?
• Other points to note: Part of site previously permitted (E/1387-56).
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support proposed Information allocation. Limited information has been provided.
Suitability for No. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is immediately adjacent to an area of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located with Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The site contains two areas of deciduous woodland and one area of additional BAP habitat. The site is also located immediately adjacent to additional areas of deciduous woodland.
BMV land Medium The majority of the site is located within Grade 3 agricultural land with the remaining part
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 113 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
located in Grade 2.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains one watercourse within the bodies site, the River Rib.
Flood risk Positive There are areas of Flood Zone 2 within this site. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is not located within the Green Belt.
Groundwater vulnerability High The site lies within SPZ1 and SPZ2.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to two Grade II* and four Grade II listed buildings.
International and national High The site is immediately adjacent to Plashes ecological designations Wood SSSI.
Land ownership Medium The site is currently not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is located within Great Barwick Manor Local Wildlife Sites Area Local Wildlife Site. The site is also immediately adjacent to Sawtrees Wood & New Plantation Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Barwick. The site is not located within close proximity to or within a site allocation in East Hertfordshire’s Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site contains two PRoW including No’s 045 and 060 and is immediately adjacent to a number of other PRoWs including 011 and 062.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to agriculture, if
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 114 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
appropriate.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Barwick and properties immediately north of Sawtrees ancient woodland (also within close proximity to Barwick Ford).
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Medium The site is located approximately 680m to the pollution to the environment east of the strategic road network (A10) but is (dust, air, water) not located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 7.1 (recycling), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.1 (health and wellbeing). Significant negative effects were identified against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 4.1 (water), 9.2 (recreation) and 3.1 (landscape). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the varied landform and land cover pattern and its sense of tranquillity. Mineral operations are likely to adversely affect the distinctive rural character of the area. There are also a number of local residents who will have open views of the site and users of the network of footpaths that cross or run adjacent to the site will also have views. Impacts cannot be fully mitigated without blocking views over the site which are currently enjoyed by the residents and footpath users.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site has not been assessed by HCC Highways as no information has provided on the proposed access points or HGV routing. Further detailed analysis will need to be provided in a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including HGV routing). Additionally, information on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 115 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS008
Site Information
Site Name: Hatfield – Furze Field Site ID Number: MLPCS008
Site Contact: Landowner and Operator – Site Visit Date 05/07/2016 – Afternoon Cemex UK Operations Ltd and Time:
Site Area: 17.3 Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 520050 210408 Planning Part of the site has been Ref.: History: approved for mineral extraction under planning District: Welwyn Hatfield permissions 6/0439-03 and 6/1430-10.
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 116 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within an area of concealed resources, in Resource Block F of IMAU Report 69. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which indicates concealed glacio-fluvial deposits across the whole of the site. The BGS superficial geology map indicates that those deposits are part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup and that they are overlain, throughout the site, by an overburden of glacial till. The site falls within the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 13.
• Tonnage of Reserves 532,000t No calculations or borehole data provided but Calculated? the stated reserves equate to 326,875 m3, which implies an average workable thickness of only 1.98m across the 16.5-hectare area of working. (This tallies with the extraction being limited to only the upper gravels, above the water table – see below). An IMAU borehole adjoining the site indicates a full mineral thickness of 7.4m beneath 3.2m of overburden. This and other boreholes across IMAU Block F indicate an average mineral thickness of 5.4m, but this is highly variable and may include mineral beneath the water table.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 117 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Yes The site is proposed by a commercial operator Assessed by Proposer? (CEMEX UK) as a remote extension to their existing operation at Symondshyde, utilising their existing plant site located off Oaklands Lane. The site would be connected via an existing conveyor system beneath Coopers Green Lane.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Based on experience from their existing for Mitigation? operations at Symondsgide, the operator considers that the site can be worked with limited environmental impact and would only work the upper gravels, to protect the groundwater.
• Deliverability: operator Yes (CEMEX UK). willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Land is owned by operator and would be willing? available within the next 1 to 5 years, to succeed the existing operations at Symondshyde.
• Other points to note: Adjoins Hatfield Quarry Planning application expected
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The site is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity of any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary Undifferentiated Aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium Approximately 80% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land with the remaining
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 118 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
20% located in non-agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Medium The site is immediately adjacent to bodies watercourses on all sides.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to the Local Wildlife Sites Furzefield Wood Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Hatfield and approximately 40m north of Astwick Manor.
The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation in the Welwyn Hatfield District Local Plan 2005. However, the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 119 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
site is located within site allocation GTLAA09 and immediately adjacent proposed site allocation SDS5 of Welwyn Hatfield’s Proposed Submission Local Plan (August 2016). It is understood that there is an agreement between Welwyn Hatfield District Council and the mineral operator to extract any mineral resource from the site prior to the development of GTLAA09.
Recreation Medium The site is located approximately 20m north of a PRoW.
Restoration Medium Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to ‘landscaped conservation’. However, it is uncertain whether this would be a high quality restoration.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Hatfield and approximately 40m north of Astwick Manor. The site is across Coopers Green Lane from a property which is located at the apex of Hatfield Avenue and Coppers Green Lane. The area of Hatfield the site is adjacent to is industrial/warehousing and not considered to be a sensitive land use.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area. (dust, air, water) However, it is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 9.4 (aerodrome safety), 9.2 (recreation loss), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the flat landform and simple land cover pattern. There could be a slight adverse impact on the perceptual character of the landscape but the area is screened and impacts could be mitigated by woodland screening along the boundary and setting mineral extraction back from the ancient woodland.
Woodland along the southern boundary will screen views from residential properties to the south and trees along the northern boundary will filter views from the footpath north of the site.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 120 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Impacts could be fully mitigated by screen planting.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. There is an existing access off Oaklands Lane. The site promoter proposes to extend the existing conveyor system to transport the minerals under Coopers Green Lane to the existing plant site located off Oaklands Lane. However, no information has been provided regarding the onward distribution of the minerals. Information on the proposed trip generation and trip distribution is required so that HCC Highways can assess what impact the additional HGV movements would have on the network. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 121 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS009
Site Information
Site Name: Hatfield Quarry – Land Site ID Number: MLPCS009 adjoining Coopers Green Lane
Site Contact: Landowner and Operator – Site Visit Date 05/07/2016 – Afternoon Cemex UK Operations Ltd and Time:
Site Area: 124.5 Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 210574 521685 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: Welwyn Hatfield
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 122 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within an area of mostly concealed resources, in Resource Block F of IMAU Report 69. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which indicates mostly concealed glacio- fluvial deposits across the whole of the site. The BGS superficial geology map indicates those deposits to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup and shows that they are overlain (concealed), except in the north-eastern part of the site, by an overburden of glacial till. The site falls within the Hertfordshire Mineral Resource Block 13.
• Tonnage of Reserves 6.6mt No calculations or borehole data provided but Calculated? the stated reserves equate to 4.125 million m3, which implies an average workable thickness of 5.57m across the anticipated 74-hectare area of working. (This tallies with the extraction being limited to only the upper gravels, above the water table – see below). IMAU boreholes within and adjoining the site indicate mineral thicknesses of 9.6 to 14.5m beneath only 0.8m of overburden, but with total interburden thicknesses of up to 4.9m. This and other boreholes across IMAU Block F indicate an average mineral thickness of 5.4m, but this is highly variable.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 123 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Yes The site is proposed by a commercial operator Assessed by Proposer? (CEMEX UK) as a further extension to their existing operation at Hatfield Quarry, utilising their existing plant site via a conveyor system.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Based on experience from their existing for Mitigation? operations at Hatfield Quarry, the operator considers that the site can be worked with limited environmental impact and would only work the upper gravels, to protect the groundwater.
• Deliverability: operator Yes (CEMEX UK). willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes The land is partly owned by the operator and willing? (negotiation partly in negotiation as an option for working. ongoing) The site would be available within the next 1 to 5 years, to succeed the proposed Furze Field extraction area.
• Other points to note: Adjoins Hatfield Quarry. The proposal is for the site to be worked at a rate of 400,000 to 600,000tpa over a period of 14 years – a substantial operation.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The site is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity of any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary Undifferentiated aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site is located immediately adjacent to one area of deciduous woodland.
The proposed restoration includes the creation of wetland which could have positive effects on BAP priority habitats and/ or species.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 124 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
BMV land Medium Approximately 60% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land, 30% in non- agricultural land and 10% is in Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains one watercourse and is bodies adjacent to an additional watercourse.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 95% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 5% located in Source Protection Zone 2.
Heritage designations Medium The site is immediately adjacent to one Grade II listed building.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low Part of the site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 125 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Hatfield and Stanborough. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation in the Welwyn Hatfield District Local Plan 2005.However, the site is located within site allocation SDS5 of Welwyn Hatfield’s Proposed Submission Local Plan (August 2016). The proposed policy for this site (SP22) states that the developer must demonstrate the extent of the mineral onsite and the likelihood of extraction prior to the development of the site, therefore ensuring that any viable mineral resource is extracted first.
Recreation High The site contains two PRoW (no: 034 and 037) in the eastern section of the site and there are others located adjacent to the site (033, 041 and 042). The site is also immediately adjacent to two designated areas of open space.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to agriculture, with some wetland conservation. It is also suggested that a landform that would not prejudice potential future residential development would also be restored.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Hatfield, Stanborough, The Old Cottage along Green Lanes, a number of properties along Great Braitch Lane and a property off Hatfield Avenue. It is also approximately 40m to the east of a property located at the junction of Hatfield Avenue and Coopers Green Lane.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Low The site is located immediately adjacent to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (A1(M)) and is not (dust, air, water) located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety) and a significant negative
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 126 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the flat landform and simple land cover pattern and the levels of existing development along the A1(m) corridor. Although the site is enclosed by high hedgerows along Cooper’s Green Lane, properties on the edge of Hatfield Garden Village has views of the site. Some of the impacts could be mitigated through woodland planting to the north of Hatfield Garden Village.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. There is an existing access off Oaklands Lane. The site promoter proposes to extend the existing conveyor system to transport the minerals under Coopers Green Lane to the existing plant site located off Oaklands Lane. Information on the proposed trip generation and trip distribution is required so that HCC Highways can assess what impact the additional HGV movements would have on the network. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 127 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS010
Site Information
Site Name: The Briggens Estate Site ID Number: MLPCS010
Site Contact: Agent - Savills Site Visit Date 14/07/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 187.75 Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 5400 2120 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: East Hertfordshire
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 128 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes, mostly The site straddles the boundary between Resource Block C of IMAU Report 112 and Resource Block B of IMAU report 46. The latter includes a significant area, within the north- eastern quadrant of the site, where the resource is shown to be overlain by ‘excessive overburden’. The resource areas, and the area of excessive overburden, are confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map. This shows the resource to comprise glacio-fluvial deposits – exposed in parts of the west but concealed over most of the site. The BGS superficial geology map indicates the resource deposits to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, in the west (but possibly of glacio-fluvial origin in the east) and shows that they are overlain, in most areas, by an overburden of glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves 10.7mt Reserve calculation is based on a comprehensive Calculated? exploratory investigation carried out by Tarmac. The reserve, which excludes the area of excessive overburden equates to 6.7 million m3 which implies an average mineral thickness of 5.97m across the 112-hectare site. IMAU boreholes within and at the edges of the site indicate 2.2 to 14.6m of sand & gravel beneath 1.5 to 14m of overburden.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 129 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Yes Ground investigation has confirmed the area of Assessed by Proposer? excessive overburden thickness which will be used as the location of the plant site. The reserve calculation excludes that area.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Proposal acknowledges that there is a minor for Mitigation? perched aquifer within the gravel deposit, but that dealing with this will not have any significant impact on the extraction.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Tarmac. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Terms for an Option Agreement are being willing? (negotiation finalised. Site will be available within 1-5 years. ongoing)
• Other points to note: It is proposed to work the site at a rate of 500,000tpa over a period of 22 years – a very substantial operation.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is immediately adjacent to Lords Wood Ancient Woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site contains two areas of deciduous woodland and is immediately adjacent to two additional areas of deciduous woodland. However, the proposed restoration includes the creation of land for nature conservation which could have positive effects on BAP priority habitats and/ or species. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 130 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
BMV land Medium Approximately 60% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land with 40% located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains one watercourse and a bodies number of small water bodies.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 50% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 2, 35% located within Source Protection Zone 3 and 15% is not located within any Source Protection Zone.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to Stanstead Abbotts Conservation Area and across the B181 from four Grade II listed buildings. The site is also adjacent to Olives Farm which contains four Grade II listed buildings and one Grade II* listed building.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The terms for an option agreement with a mineral operator are being finalised.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 131 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is immediately adjacent to Lord’s Local Wildlife Sites Wood Key Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Hunsdon Road Cottages and approximately 110m east of Stanstead Abbotts. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site contains three PRoW (No’s:002, 020 and 023). In addition, PRoW 022 is adjacent to the site.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to agriculture, forestry and land to improve biodiversity.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Hunsdon Road Cottages and surrounds Coldharbour Farm. The site is also located immediately adjacent to Home Farm, Olives Farm and properties along Cat’s Hill. The site is also on the opposite side of the B181 where a number of additional properties are located.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Low The site is located immediately adjacent to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (A414) and is not (dust, air, water) located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 4.1 (water) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (heritage), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the gently undulating landform and its enclosure by both topography and existing vegetation. Impacts could be mitigated by safeguarding valued features within the site such as existing mature tree and woodland coppices. Post-operation restoration could provide the opportunity to increase the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 132 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
quality of the hedged field boundaries. Although there is a very limited number of properties with open views over the site, the impacts of mineral extraction could be mitigated by screening without losing their existing visual amenity. Impacts on recreational users of the Harcamlow Way could be mitigated by woodland screening or a diversion of the footpath. Any impacts on visual amenity could be fully mitigated with woodland planting.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to raise significant concerns which are likely to attract highway objections. The site is located immediately north of the A414 and the site promoter states that access is anticipated to taken via the B181 and HGV movements directed to the A414. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the junction of the A414 and B181 as having existing capacity problems. Additionally, discussions with HCC Highways Network Management would be required regarding the HGV route and weight restrictions on the network. Detailed analysis and suggested mitigation measures will need to accompany a planning application, in addition to a site specific Transport Assessment.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 133 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS011
Site Information
Site Name: Water Hall Quarry – Farm Site ID Number: MLPCS011 Fields Area
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 29/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 24.3ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 529900 209800 Planning History: The site has been subject to Ref.: five minerals planning applications four of which District: East Hertfordshire were refused (E/1246-6728, E/0827-6829, 3/0531-7430 and 3/1236-0131) and one of which was withdrawn (3/0464-94).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
28 Site refused on the grounds that the excavation of this valley floor would destroy the present scenic character of a particularly attractive reach of river and would be detrimental to the amenity of the area generally. In addition, there is no overriding need of the sand and gravel industry as a whole which would justify the granting of consent. 29 Same reasoning as application E/1246-67. 30 Same reasoning as application E/1246-67. Refusal appealed. 31 Site refused on the grounds that the proposal would not conserve the landscape of the Lea Valley; limit the capacity of the floodplain and increase the risk of flooding elsewhere; is premature and would prejudice the outcome of the Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Review; the proposed landform is not natural in appearance and does not sit harmoniously within the surrounding landscape; the proposal would be intrusive in the local landscape particularly during working, having a detrimental impact upon the setting of Roxford House and the bridge over Roxford Moat, listed buildings and Roxford Moat, scheduled ancient monument.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 134 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls partly within Resource Block D of IMAU Report 112 and partly within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67. The resource areas are confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which shows sub-alluvial river terrace deposits over most of the site, flanked by (and probably underlain by) older glacio-fluvial deposits. The BGS superficial geology map indicates the sub-alluvial gravels to be part of the post-glacial Kempton Park Gravel Formation and shows the older deposits to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup.
• Tonnage of Reserves 956,000t No calculations are provided, although mineral Calculated? operator seems to be involved and it is likely that an assessment will have been carried out. The indicated tonnage equates to 597,500 m3, implying an average mineral thickness of 4.15m over the expected 14.4-hectare area of working. An IMAU Borehole close to the site indicates 2.6m of mineral beneath 2.4m of overburden. This is less mineral than indicated by the operator, which is why more evidence on their resource assessment is needed.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved, (the Agent’s Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed client is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that based on some assessment will have been carried out, but
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 135 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
industry there is no clear evidence of this. Unlike involvement) adjoining proposals, this site is not dependent on inert waste to achieve restoration, but there is
no evidence to show that the costs of habitat creation and aftercare have been adequately considered?..
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Consideration has been given to hydraulic for Mitigation? continuity between the gravels and the underlying Chalk aquifer, which will require a comprehensive scheme of monitoring and mitigation, and also to the mitigation of dust Impacts and the enhancement of biodiversity.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Mineral operator (of the existing Water Hall willing? Quarry has ‘overriding mineral working options’.
• Deliverability: landowner No Proposal made by site promoter’s Agent. willing? Landowner confirmation has been received for part of the site but the site has multiple landownership and no confirmation was received following request from HCC relating to part of the site. Site will be available any time after 1 year.
• Other points to note: Previous application for this site was refused in 2002 for 6 reasons: 1. Landscape, 2. Flood Risk, 3. Prematurity, 4. Landform, 5, Intrusive in landscape, 6. Impact on setting of historical buildings and ancient monument. The proposal is to extract 170,000 tpa over 5.5 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Most information is adequate, but confirmation of mineral Information operator, landowner willingness and evidence of reserve calculation (including proven thickness of mineral) is needed, given that a (single) IMAU borehole suggests only limited thickness. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – proposer failed to respond to the request for additional consideration as a Specific information. Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity of any areas of ancient woodland.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 136 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary A aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site contains one area of deciduous woodland and is immediately adjacent to two other areas of deciduous woodland. Two further areas of deciduous woodland are located on the opposite side of Lower Hatfield Road. However, the proposed restoration includes the creation of two lakes separated by wetland (14.4ha) and the provision on new wildlife habitat (1.5ha) which could have positive effects on BAP priority habitats and/ or species. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
BMV land Medium The site is entirely located within Grade 3 Agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is located immediately adjacent to Waterhall Farm Quarry. However, Waterhall Farm Quarry is inactive with regard to mineral extraction, as such, no cumulative effects are likely. Furthermore, the site has been put forward by the owner of the existing quarry and it is likely that extraction at this site will only commence once works on the existing quarry have been completed, if Waterhall Quarry ever became active again. The site is also within close proximity to Bunkers Hill Quarry but it is currently being restored.
Ecological status of water High The site contains one watercourse and is bodies immediately adjacent to another watercourse.
Flood risk Positive The site is located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 137 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 85% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 15% not located within any Source Protection Zone
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to the Roxford Moated Site Scheduled Monument.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a mineral operator.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is immediately adjacent to the River Local Wildlife Sites Lea Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Low The site is not located within or in close residential or built development proximity to any existing settlements or any site allocations within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site is located immediately adjacent to a PRoW (No: 074) and is within 100m of three more PRoW (No’s: 054, 074 and 254).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to two lakes separated by wetland (14.4ha) and new wildlife habitats on adjacent land (11.5ha).
Sensitive land uses Medium The site is located within close proximity of Roxford and a number of properties located on the opposite side of Lower Hatfield Road.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 138 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 landscape), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation) and significant negative effects against 1.1 (biodiversity). In addition, the SA identifies a significant positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 6.2 (flood alleviation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the flat landform, the enclosed nature of the site and the proximity to existing mineral extraction sites. Impacts could be fully mitigated by screening and post-extraction restoration could strengthen the character of the river corridor which is adjacent to the site. There are also a limited number of residential properties within the vicinity of the site and impacts on them could be fully mitigated by screen planting without adversely changing their visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. It is stated by the site promoter that minerals can be carried over private land directly to the processing plant at Water Hall Quarry. This being the case, the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 139 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS012
Site Information
Site Name: Water Hall Quarry – Broad Site ID Number: MLPCS012 Green Area
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 11.8ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 210001 530723 Planning The site has been subject to Ref.: History: two mineral planning applications one of which District: East Hertfordshire was refused (3/0705-1332) and one of which was withdrawn (E/1485-64).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
32 Site refused due to the proposal involving working outside of an identified Preferred Area, wherein planning permission for mineral extraction will only be granted when the landbank is below the required level and there is a need for the proposal to maintain the County's appropriate contribution to local, regional and national need that cannot be met from the identified area, and it can be demonstrated that the proposals would not prejudice the timely working of Preferred Areas; or sterilisation of resources will otherwise occur; the application has failed to demonstrate a particular need for the mineral and it is not evident that sterilisation would occur; and the site is located within the Green Belt.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 140 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The southern part of the site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67 whilst the northern part falls within Resource Block D of IMAU Report 112. The resource areas are confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies them as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping identifies the resources as part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are overlain (except along the north-western side of the site) by glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves 450,000t No calculations are provided, although mineral Calculated? operator seems to be involved and it is likely that a careful assessment will have been carried out. The indicated tonnage equates to 281,250 m3, implying an average mineral thickness of 4.02m over the 7-hectare area of working. The nearest IMAU borehole within the same deposit reveals 6.6m of sand & gravel beneath a 5.4m overburden of glacial till.
• Economic Viability Yes Evidenced by previous working of the adjoining Assessed by Proposer? site and by virtue of making use of existing plant & infrastructure. The proposal relies partly on inert waste (from the operator’s MRF at Water Hall) which should be viable based on recent planning history. No anticipated exceptional
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 141 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
costs.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to for Mitigation? for hydrological issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for. Given the significance of the underlying Chalk aquifer and the location of the site within a groundwater source protection zone (3), this may be too simplistic, and additional monitoring/ mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust and ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Mineral operator (of the existing Water Hall willing? Quarry) has ‘overriding mineral working options’.
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposal made by landowner’s Agent. willing? Site will be available any time after 1 year.
• Other points to note: Existing PP (for adjoining site) was granted on appeal in 2014 This proposal is for an extension to that site. It is proposed to extract 150,000tpa over a period of 3 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information More convincing evidence would be needed at the planning application stage regarding the mitigation of (currently unexpected) potential impacts on groundwater.
Suitability for Yes. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity of any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary Undifferentiated aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium The site is located entirely within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 142 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Cumulative effects Low The site is within close proximity to Bunkers Hill Quarry but it is currently being restored.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a mineral operator.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to residential or built development Broad Green Wood. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation of the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 143 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Recreation Low The site does not contain nor is it located within close proximity to any PRoW or recreational facilities.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Broad Green Wood.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and a significant adverse effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection). In addition, a minor positive effect is recorded in relation to SA objective 9.3 (recreation provision). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the gently sloping landform, simple land cover pattern and its enclosed nature. The proximity to former and operational mineral sites decreases the rural quality of the immediate area. However, valued features such as the historic field pattern should be safeguarded. There are also few residential properties within the vicinity of the site and only those at Broad Green Wood have open views, which due to the flat nature of the site, could be mitigated without losing existing visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. The site promoter states that mineral extraction would be carried over private land, through Bunkers Hill Quarry, across Lower Hatfield road directly to the processing plant at Water Hall Quarry. As the minerals will be processed at Water Hall, the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 144 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 145 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS013
Site Information
Site Name: Harry’s Field Site ID Number: MLPCS013
Site Contact: Agent – Mike Chamley Site Visit Date 05/07/2016 – Morning Associates and Time:
Site Area: 4.6ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 202600 500100 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: Dacorum
Mineral to Brick Clay extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 146 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site is located within an area of brick clay resources, as identified on the digital BGS Resource Maps. On the BGS superficial geology maps those resources are identified as part of the ‘Clay with Flints’ deposits which directly overlie and infill solution hollows within the underlying Cretaceous Chalk. The site is directly adjacent to the existing Bovingdon Brick Works and within a continuation of precisely the same deposits.
• Tonnage of Reserves c140,000t Not assessed in detail. Approximate gross Calculated? reserve estimated at 70,000 m3 (equivalent to circa 140,000 tonnes) over the 4 hectare site.
• Economic Viability Yes Operator’s proposal. Assessed by Proposer?
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Allows for dust control and no groundwater for Mitigation? impacts are anticipated, based on the environmental assessment of the adjoining land under planning consent 4/2819-15 (CM0017). No evidence of consideration of other potential impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Proposal submitted by Agent for the operator willing? (Bovingdon Brickworks Ltd.)
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 147 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Deliverability: landowner Not known Same landowner as the Cox & Croft Field site to willing? the south east. Brick-clay extraction would be subject to extending or agreeing a new lease/option with the landowner and any agreements needed for the access route. Timing would be subject to assessing how best to work the site with respect to planning consent 4/2819-15 (CM0017). The site could be a replacement site when Cox & Croft Fields has been exhausted or it may be possible to work adjacent areas concurrently.
• Other points to note: Planning consent 4/2819-15 (CM0017) for brick-clay extraction on land to south east (Cox & Croft Fields). It is proposed to extract approximately 15,000tpa. As a natural extension to the Cox & Croft Fields site to the south east.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. The Information proposal is informed to a large extent by the detailed assessments carried out in connection with the recently acquired permission for adjoining fields to the South-east. More specific evidence of consideration of impacts on ecology etc. would be helpful but not considered essential at this stage.
Suitability for Yes: This is a fully viable and properly assessed proposal. consideration as a Specific Moreover, the allocation is needed to support the long term Site allocation, on resource future operation of this, the only remaining brickworks site in grounds Hertfordshire. The proposed site is directly adjacent to existing workings and processing facilities.
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Low The site is not located within an aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Positive The site is located approximately 50m south of one area of deciduous woodland and 70m west of another area of deciduous woodland. The proposed restoration includes ecological restoration which could have positive effects on BAP priority species and/or habitats. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 148 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
BMV land Medium Approximately 90% of the site is Grade 2 agricultural land with the remaining 10% located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 2.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located adjacent to Leyhill Road where two Grade II listed buildings are located on the opposite side.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Positive The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
The proposed restoration includes ecological restoration which could have positive effects
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 149 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
on nature conservation. However, this is uncertain as details will not be known until the planning application stage.
Proximity of allocated Low The site is not located within close proximity to residential or built development an existing settlement nor is it located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the Dacorum District Core Strategy 2013 or Dacorum District Draft Site Allocations DPD 2016.
Recreation Medium The site is located within 100m of two PRoW (No’s: 007 and 009).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored primarily back to agricultural use with associated ecological restoration.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to properties along Shantock Lane. The site is also on the opposite side of Leyhill Road where there are a number of additional properties.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage) and 3.1 (landscape) and significant adverse effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the flat landform and enclosure from hedgerow and hedgerow trees. The site’s proximity to existing built development (i.e. existing brickworks and builders merchants’ yard) also reduces its sensitivity. Valued features such as the hedgerows and mature trees at the perimeter and the small copse that border the south eastern boundary of the site should be safeguarded. There are few properties within the vicinity of the site and only those on Shantock Lane have open views. Due to the flat landform these impacts could be mitigated by screening without losing existing visual amenity. Furthermore, mitigation planting has recently been planted along the curtilage boundaries. It is considered that impacts on visual amenity could be fully mitigated with woodland screen planting.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 150 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. To the southeast of the site there is a site which was subject to a minerals planning application (4/2819-15) and HCC Highways did not object to the development subject to conditions. The site promoter states that the access route constructed under application 4/2819-15 would be used for this site. The access arrangement for this site would therefore be subject to the conditions attached to planning permission 4/2819-15. Additionally, the site promoter when submitting a planning application would need to provide additional information on the number of HGV movements the site will generate in order to determine the impact of the additional HGV movements on the network and whether the intensification of the proposed access (under 4/2819-15) is acceptable.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 151 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS014
Site Information
Site Name: Water Hall Quarry – Bunkers Site ID Number: MLPCS014 Hill South Area
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 18.1ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 209397 530439 Planning History: Part of the site was subject Ref.: to a mineral planning application which was District: East Hertfordshire withdrawn (3/0040-99).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 152 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67. The resource area is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies the material as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping identifies the resources as part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are overlain over almost all of the site by glacial till. The site forms a south-easterly continuation of the same deposits which have already been worked at Bunkers Hill (Water Hall).
• Tonnage of Reserves 1mt No calculations are provided, although mineral Calculated? operator seems to be involved and it is likely that an assessment will have been carried out. The indicated tonnage equates to 625,000m3, implying an average mineral thickness of 3.86m over the 16.2-hectare area of working. A single IMAU borehole within the site reveals 6.1m of sand & gravel beneath a 10.6m overburden of glacial till.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved, (the Agent’s Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed client is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that based on some assessment will have been carried out, but industry there is no clear evidence of this. Given the presence of significant overburden within at least
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 153 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
involvement part of this site, a critical issue could be the ratio of mineral to overburden, and no evidence has
been provided on this. The proposal also relies partly on inert waste (from the operator’s MRF at Water Hall) to achieve restoration, which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to water for Mitigation? for environment issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for. The gravels are underlain by London Clay and Lambeth Group clays, silts and sands, rather than directly by the Chalk aquifer, but the site is located within a groundwater source protection zone (3) and additional monitoring/mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Some allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust impacts and for the avoidance of significant ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Mineral operator (of the existing Water Hall willing? Quarry? holds a mineral working option.
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Land appears to be owned by the operator and willing? the Agent advises that there would be no legal or ownership constraints Site will be available any time after 1 year.
• Other points to note: It is proposed to extract 150,000tpa over a period of 3 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support the proposed Information allocation. More convincing evidence is needed on economic viability, including allowance for the mitigation of (currently unexpected) potential impacts on groundwater. Confirmation of mineral operator’s involvement would also be helpful. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is immediately adjacent to one area of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 154 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within a Secondary Undifferentiated Aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium The site is entirely located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is within close proximity to Bunkers Hill Quarry but it is currently being restored.
Ecological status of water Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to a bodies water course.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 15% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 85% not located within any Source Protection Zone.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a minerals operator.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 155 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located within close proximity of residential or built development Broad Green Wood. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site is located immediately adjacent to one PRoW (No: 004).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Bayford Hall and Bayford Hall Farm.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 landscape) and 9.2 (recreation loss) and a significant negative effect against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the gently undulating landform, simple land cover pattern and proximity to restored or active mineral sites which decrease the rural quality of the immediate area. There are a limited number of residential properties in the vicinity of the site and distant views of the site from Broad Green. Impacts could be fully mitigated by screening that would be in keeping with the existing landscape character and without adversely affecting visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns.
It is stated that the minerals would be carried over private land, through Bunkers Hill Quarry, across Lower Hatfield Road directly to the processing plant at Water Hall Quarry. This would
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 156 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
result in an increase in HGVs crossing the Lower Hatfield Road which could lead to congestion and safety issues along the road. As the minerals will be processed at Water Hall, the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. Further information is required with regards to the level of intensification the site would create at this access and also information on how this would be managed with the existing services. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, details of the proposed access arrangement would be required so that HCC Highways can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 157 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS015
Site Information
Site Name: Plashes Farm Site ID Number: MLPCS015
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 29/06/16 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 24.4ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 220324 538030 Planning History: Part of the site has been Ref.: approved for mineral extraction under planning District: East Hertfordshire permissions (3/1391-01 and 3/2158-00).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 158 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas Yes Parts of the site have been worked which may reduce the available deposit. The viability of the reserve would need to be established by borehole data across the site.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes, mostly The southern tip of the site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 112. The northern part of the site is not covered by any IMAU report but the resources continue, as confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies the material as glacio-fluvial sand & gravel deposits. These are shown to be concealed in the southern part of the site (but only south of a sheet boundary, suggesting a difference of interpretation by different geologists). The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping confirms the material to be glacio- fluvial in origin and shows the whole of the resource area to be unconcealed by overlying deposits.
• Tonnage of Reserves 500,000t No calculations are provided, although mineral Calculated? operator is involved and it is likely that an assessment will have been carried out. The indicated tonnage equates to 312,500m3, implying an average mineral thickness of only 1.49m over the 21-hectare area of working. This is much less than the depth indicated by IMAU data but it may reflect the fact that the deposits will not be worked below the water table, in order to minimise impacts on groundwater.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 159 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
The nearest IMAU boreholes are some distance to the south, in an area where resources of 5.3 to 6.4m of sand & gravel are concealed beneath up to 12.3m of glacial till (but this is not likely to be characteristic of the site itself, most of which should have little if any overburden).
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved, (the Agent’s Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed client is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that based on some assessment will have been carried out, but industry there is no clear evidence of this. Given the involvement) apparently limited thickness of workable mineral (above the water table) and the possibility of
significant overburden, a critical issue on this site might be the ratio of mineral to overburden, but no evidence has been provided on this. The proposal also relies partly on inert waste landfilling to achieve restoration, which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to water for Mitigation? for environment issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for. The gravels are underlain by London Clay, rather than directly by the Chalk aquifer, but the site is located within a groundwater source protection zone (2), and additional monitoring/mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Some allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust impacts and for the avoidance of significant ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Yes The site is owned by a mineral operator. willing?
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Proposal submitted by landowner’s/ operator’s willing? Agent. Site will be available any time after 1 year.
• Other points to note: Some previous applications permitted. It is proposed to work the site at a rate of 100,000tpa over 5 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support the proposed Information allocation. More convincing evidence is needed on economic viability. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 160 March 2017 Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Very High The site contains three areas of ancient woodland and is located immediately adjacent to three additional areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The site contains three areas of deciduous woodland and is located immediately adjacent to one additional area of deciduous woodland.
BMV land Medium The site is entirely located within Grade 2 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Medium The site contains one water body. bodies
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 2.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to one Grade II* and one Grade II listed building.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 161 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
International and national Very High The site contains and is immediately adjacent ecological designations to Plashes Wood SSSI.
Land ownership Low The site is in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is partly within Blackey Mead Wood Local Wildlife Sites (High Cross) Local Wildlife Site and is immediately adjacent to Badger’s Eye Plantation and Plashes Farm Buildings Local Wildlife Sites.
Proximity of allocated Low The site is not located within close proximity of residential or built development an existing settlement. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation with the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site contains three PRoW (No’s: 041, 043, and 044).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to Plashes Farm.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air quality effects), 3.1 (landscape) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the varied landform, historic field pattern and valued landscape features. Mineral extraction is likely to disturb the strong rural character of the site and the impacts could not be fully mitigated.
The southern half of the site is fairly open and there are open views of the site from footpaths
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 162 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
which cross the site. Impacts on the visual amenity of some residents in the village of Barwick could be mitigated by screening to the north of the village.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. Access to the site would be via Gore Lane with HGV movements directed onto the A10. Discussions with HCC Highways would be required to determine the level of improvements that would be required/appropriate for Gore Lane and so they can assess its feasibility. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGVs.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 163 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS016
Site Information
Site Name: Water Hall Quarry – Howe Site ID Number: MLPCS016 Green Area
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 25.8ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 528943 209246 Planning Part of the site has been Ref.: History: subject to a mineral planning application which District: East Hertfordshire was refused (IDO-094- 4933).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
33 No proper documents found. Application appears to have been refused or delayed. Stated as non-determination.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 164 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Partly The whole of the site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67, but only the northern part of the site is shown, in that report, as containing sand & gravel resources. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies the sand & gravel as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits and shows these to be confined to the northern part of the site. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping shows the resources to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are overlain in the south by glacial till. Both the resource map and the superficial geology map also show a small part of the resource area, at the northern edge of the site, to include younger river terrace deposits.
• Tonnage of Reserves 1.7mt No calculations are provided, although mineral Calculated? operator is involved and it is likely that an assessment will have been carried out. The indicated tonnage equates to 1.062 million m3, implying an average mineral thickness of 6.18m over the anticipated 17.2-hectare area of working. (That corresponds to the area of resource within the site as shown on the BGS resource map).
The nearest IMAU boreholes within the same resource block, located some distance to the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 165 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
west and east of this site, indicate 12.7 and 6.1m of sand & gravel beneath 2.4 and 10.6m of glacial till overburden, respectively.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved, (the Agent’s Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed client is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that based on some assessment will have been carried out, but industry there is no clear evidence of this. No restoration involvement) is described in the proposal, although other proposals by same operator rely at least partly on infilling with inert waste, which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows No No information is provided with the proposal for Mitigation? regarding any environmental impacts, so no allowance can have been made for mitigation.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Mineral operator (of the existing Water Hall willing? Quarry has ‘overriding mineral working options’.
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Operator has mineral working option. Multiple willing? landownership, no confirmation was received following request from HCC relating to a small part of the site. Site will be available any time after 1 year.
• Other points to note: No assessment is offered as to the rate or duration of extraction.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is currently inadequate to support the proposed Information allocation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within in close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or Habitats areas to known to include BAP species.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 166 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
BMV land Medium Approximately 40% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land with the remaining 60% located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to Bedwell Park Quarry both of which are within close proximity to Howe Green.
Ecological status of water High The site contains one watercourse which also runs bodies down its eastern boundary.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Low The site is under option to a minerals operator.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is allocated immediately adjacent to Howe residential or built Green. development The site is not located within or in close proximity
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 167 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site contains one PRoW (No: 074) and Bridleway (074) to the west and is within 100m of two other PRoW (No: 074) to the south.
Restoration Medium No use has been suggested for the site’s restoration. As such, it is uncertain whether a high quality restoration would take place once mineral extraction has finished.
Sensitive land uses High The site is allocated immediately adjacent to Howe Green. The site is also within close proximity to a property at Ashfield Farm and one property along Robins Nest Hill.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close proximity pollution to the environment to an Air Quality Management Area but is not (dust, air, water) located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects against (incorporating HRA findings) SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the site’s openness, historic field system and its rural character. However, some impacts could be mitigated by screening to the west and post-excavation restoration offers opportunities to improve degraded hedgerow structure. Views of the site from Howe Green are possible and there are open views from the footpaths that cross the site. Impacts on these receptors could be partially mitigated through screening.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site has not been assessed by HCC Highways as no details of access arrangements have been provided. If access is proposed to be from Robins Nest Hill it is anticipated that improvements will be required to accommodate the proposal. It should be noted that the minerals extracted will be processed at Water Hall Quarry. This being the case, the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall Quarry will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 168 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGVs). Additionally, details of the proposed arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 169 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS017
Site Information
Site Name: Robins Nest Hill Site ID Number: MLPCS017
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 30/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 11.7ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 209296 529341 Planning The site was subject to a Ref.: History: mineral planning application which was refused (IDO- District: East Hertfordshire 094-4934).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
34 No proper documents found. Application appears to have been refused or delayed. Stated as non-determination.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 170 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Partly The site falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67, but only the northern part of the site is shown, in that report, as containing sand & gravel resources. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies the sand & gravel as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping shows the resources to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup and, unlike the resource map, shows these to be present beneath the whole of the site, overlain in part by glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves 1mt No reserve calculations are provided. The Calculated? indicated tonnage equates to 625,000 m3, which implies an average mineral thickness of 6.58m over the anticipated working area of 9.5 hectares. (That represents a much greater area than the resource outcrop within the site as shown on the BGS resource map and therefore will need to be justified by borehole data). The mineral would be worked only above the water table to minimise impacts on groundwater.
The nearest IMAU boreholes within the same resource block, located some distance to the west and east of this site, indicate 12.7 and 6.1m of sand & gravel beneath 2.4 and 10.6m of
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 171 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
glacial till overburden, respectively.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved (the Agent’s client Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that some based on assessment will have been carried out, but there industry is no clear evidence of this. The proposal relies involvement) partly on inert waste landfilling to achieve restoration , which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to water for Mitigation? for environment issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for, other than limiting the depth of extraction. Given the significance of the underlying Chalk aquifer and the location of the site within a groundwater source protection zone (3), this may be too simplistic, and additional monitoring/ mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Some allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust impacts and for the avoidance of significant ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Not known No evidence of mineral operator involvement willing? yet, although Agent’s client is Water Hall (England).
• Deliverability: landowner No Lease and working arrangements would need to willing? be agreed with the landowner. No confirmation was received following request from HCC. In addition there is an outstanding covenant restriction which has to be taken through due legal process to be removed. Site is expected to be available within 1 to 5 years.
• Other points to note: Previous application refused. It is proposed to extract 150,000tpa over a period of 6.5 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is inadequate to support the proposed allocation. Information Evidence is needed on economic viability, including allowance for the mitigation of (currently unexpected) potential impacts on groundwater. Confirmation of mineral operator involvement and landowner agreement is also needed. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 172 March 2017 Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium Approximately 30% of the site is located within Grade 2 agricultural land with the remaining 70% located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water Medium The site is immediately adjacent to a bodies watercourse.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 173 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Low The site is not located within or immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to a Local Nature Reserve or Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located within close proximity to residential or built development Howe Green. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation Low The site does not contain nor is it located within close proximity to any PRoW or recreational facilities.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses Medium The site is located within close proximity to one property along Robins Nest Hill.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant adverse effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection). In addition, the SA identifies a minor positive effect (with some uncertainty) against SA objective 9.3 (recreation provision). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the site’s openness, historic field system and its rural character. Some impacts could be mitigated by screening and post-excavation restoration offers opportunities to improve the degraded hedgerow
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 174 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
structure. There are filtered views of the site from Howe Green and local footpaths within the vicinity of the site and there is one residential property within the vicinity of the site with open views. However, it is considered that views from this property could be mitigated by screen planting.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. The site would be accessed via Robins Nest Hill which has constraints that are likely to be overcome by modest highway improvements. It should be noted that the minerals extracted from the site would be processed at Water Hall Quarry. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall Quarry will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGVs). Additionally, details of the proposed arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 175 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS018
Site Information
Site Name: Southfield Wood East Site ID Number: MLPCS018
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 29/06/2016 – Morning and Time:
Site Area: 16.7ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 211056 530564 Planning History: Part of the site has been Ref.: subject to a mineral planning permission which District: East Hertfordshire was refused (3/1568/7835).
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
35 No record found.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 176 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site falls within Resource Block D of IMAU Report 112. The resource is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies the material as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping identifies the resources as part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are overlain over almost all of the site by glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves 500,000t No reserve calculations are provided. The Calculated? indicated tonnage equates to 312,500m3, which implies an average mineral thickness of only 2.23m over the anticipated working area of 14 hectares. Nearby IMAU boreholes reveal 1.5 to 7.5m of sand & gravel beneath a 1.5 to 8.8m overburden of glacial till.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved (the Agent’s client Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that some based on assessment will have been carried out, but there industry is no clear evidence of this. Given the involvement) apparently limited thickness of mineral and the presence of significant overburden, a critical issue on this site could be the ratio of mineral to overburden, and no evidence has been provided on this. The proposal also relies partly on inert
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 177 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
waste landfilling to achieve restoration , which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to water for Mitigation? for environment issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for, although the deposit is said to be entirely above the water table. However, given the significance of the underlying Chalk aquifer and the location of the site within a groundwater source protection zone (3), this may be too simplistic, and additional monitoring/ mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Some allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust impacts and for the avoidance of significant ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Not known No evidence of mineral operator involvement willing? yet, although Agent’s client is Water Hall (England).
• Deliverability: landowner No Lease and working arrangements would need to willing? be agreed with the landowner. Note that surface and minerals ownership are held separately with ‘overriding mineral interest’ – but no indication that an operator has secured those rights. No confirmation was received following request from HCC. Subject to the above, the site is expected to be available within 1 to 5 years.
• Other points to note: It is proposed to extract the mineral at a rate of 150,000tpa over a period of 3.3 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is inadequate to support the proposed allocation. Information More convincing evidence is needed on economic viability, including allowance for the mitigation of (currently unexpected) potential impacts on groundwater. Confirmation of mineral operator involvement and landowner agreement is also needed. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for . No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 178 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland High The site is located immediately adjacent to one area of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Low The site is not located within any BAP habitats or areas to known to include BAP species.
BMV land Medium The site is entirely located within Grade 2 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is located immediately adjacent to Waterhall Farm Quarry. However, it is inactive with regard to mineral extraction. Furthermore, the site has been put forward by the owner of the existing quarry and it is considered that extraction at this site will only commence once works on the existing quarry have been completed.
Ecological status of water Low The site does not contain nor is it located near bodies to a water body.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The site is entirely located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to the Hertingfordbury Conservation Area.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 179 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is immediately adjacent to Southfield Local Wildlife Sites Wood Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located within close proximity to residential or built development Hertingfordbury. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation High The site contains two PRoW (Nos: 002 and 057).
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses Medium The site is located within close proximity of a number of properties along St. Mary’s Lane.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Medium The site is located within close proximity to the pollution to the environment strategic road network (A414) and is not (dust, air, water) located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies a minor negative effect (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 3.1 (landscape) and significant negative effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (historic environment) and 9.2 (recreation). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have low-moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the gently undulating landform and its elevated and enclosed position above the River Lea. Impacts could be fully mitigated by screening and setting mineral extraction back from the ancient woodland. Views of the site from the locality are limited and could be mitigated be screening.
However, mineral workings are likely to be seen by people using the footpath crossing the site
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 180 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
unless it is diverted.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. Access would be directly over company land to the existing Water Hall Quarry processing plant. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall Quarry will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGVs). Additionally, details of the proposed arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 181 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS019
Site Information
Site Name: Pipers End Site ID Number: MLPCS019
Site Contact: Agent – Terra Consult Site Visit Date 29/06/2016 – Afternoon and Time:
Site Area: 25.2ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 210423 529310 Planning The site has no relevant Ref.: History: planning history.
District: East Hertfordshire
Mineral to Sand and Gravel extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 182 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within in an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The site does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes Most of the site falls within Resource Block E of IMAU Report 69. The southern tip of the site continues into Resource Block B of IMAU Report 67. The resource areas are confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map, which identifies them as concealed glacio-fluvial deposits. The more detailed BGS superficial geology mapping identifies the resources as part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, which are overlain over almost all of the site by glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves 1.4mt No borehole evidence provided to support Calculated? calculation. The estimated tonnage equates to 875,000m3, which implies an average mineral thickness of 4.38m over the anticipated working area of 20-hectares (Note: It is stated as 2ha at the start of the proforma, which is assumed to be an error). Nearby IMAU Borehole and Exposure records reveal 5.7 to more than 12m of sand & gravel beneath 8.2 to 15.6m of glacial till overburden.
• Economic Viability Partly A mineral operator is involved (the Agent’s client Assessed by Proposer? (Assumed is Water Hall), so it can be assumed that some based on assessment will have been carried out, but there industry is no clear evidence of this. Given the presence involvement) of significant overburden, a critical issue on this
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 183 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
site could be the ratio of mineral to overburden, and no evidence has been provided on this. The proposal also relies partly on inert waste landfilling to achieve restoration , which may or may not be viable.
• Economic Viability Allows Partly allowed Some consideration has been given to water for Mitigation? for. environment issues but no impacts are assumed and no mitigation has been allowed for, although the deposit is expected (by the Agent) to be entirely above the water table. However, given the significance of the underlying Chalk aquifer and the location of the site within a groundwater source protection zone (3), this may be too simplistic, and additional monitoring/ mitigation costs might need to be allowed for. Some allowance has been made for the minimisation of dust impacts and for the avoidance of significant ecological impacts.
• Deliverability: operator Not known No evidence of mineral operator involvement willing? yet, although Agent’s client is Water Hall (England).
• Deliverability: landowner No Lease and working arrangements would need to willing? be agreed with the landowner. No confirmation was received following request from HCC. Subject to this, the site is expected to be available within the next 6 to 10 years.
• Other points to note: Extraction is proposed at a rate of 150,000tpa Over a period of 9.3 years.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is inadequate to support the proposed allocation. Information More convincing evidence is needed on economic viability, including allowance for the mitigation of (currently unexpected) potential impacts on groundwater. Confirmation of mineral operator involvement and landowner agreement is also needed. Evidence is also needed to support the reserve calculation. No further evidence was submitted in response to the request for supplementary information.
Suitability for No – inadequate information. consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 184 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low The site is not located within close proximity to any areas of ancient woodland.
Aquifers Medium The site is located within Secondary A and Secondary Undifferentiated aquifers.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The site contains one area of deciduous woodland.
BMV land Medium The site is entirely located within Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is located within close proximity to Waterhall Farm Quarry. However, it is inactive with regard to mineral extraction. Furthermore, the site has been put forward by the owner of the existing quarry and it is considered that extraction at this site will only commence once works on the existing quarry have been completed.
Ecological status of water High The site contains two watercourses and is bodies immediately adjacent to two additional watercourses.
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2- 3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium Approximately 85% of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3 with the remaining 15% not located within any Source Protection Zone.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 185 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Heritage designations Low The site is not located within or immediately adjacent to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Low The site is not located within a landscape designation.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The site is located immediately adjacent to Local Wildlife Sites Spring Wood (near Howe Green) Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The site is located within close proximity of residential or built development Letty Green. The site is not located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the East Hertfordshire Local Plan 2007.
Recreation Medium The site is located within the grounds of the Hertfordshire Polo Club.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored back to agricultural use.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to a number of properties along Woolmers Lane. The site is also located within the grounds of the Hertfordshire Polo Club.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) but is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies minor negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objective 2.1 (heritage), 3.1 (landscape) and 4.1 (water quality) and significant adverse effects against SA objective 1.1 (biodiversity protection) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to its unified rural
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 186 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
character and valued features. However, the well wooded character means impacts on the surrounding landscape could be mitigated by effective screening that is in character with the landscape. There are a limited number of properties within the vicinity of the site and only two cottages have open views of the site. Due to the flat landform impacts on these cottages could be mitigated though screening without losing the existing visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways concerns. It is proposed that minerals would be transported over company land to the existing Water Hall Quarry processing plant. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall Quarry will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past. The countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. This would require further investigation. Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact on the network (including the proposed routing of HGVs). Additionally, details of the proposed arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 187 March 2017 Site Selection Proforma: MLPCS020
Site Information
Site Name: Roundhill Wood Site ID Number: MLPCS020
Site Contact: Agent – Stephen Bowley Site Visit Date 19/09/16 - Morning Planning Consultancy and Time:
Site Area: 9.4 ha Attendees: Jonny Hill
Central Grid 208179 493652 Planning Part of the wider site in the Ref.: History: landownership was subject to planning permission for District: Dacorum the importation of clean waste to infill the old clay working (4/1142-86). This does not cover this site boundary.
Mineral to Brick Clay extract:
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 188 March 2017 Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The site is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning permission No The site does not have planning for other development permission for an incompatible use with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The site has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes.
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes The site is located within an area of brick clay resources, as identified on the digital BGS Resource Maps. On the BGS superficial geology maps those resources are identified as part of the ‘Clay with Flints’ deposits which directly overlie and infill solution hollows within the underlying Cretaceous Chalk. The site is located approximately 3km by road from the existing Bellingdon Brick Works within a similar but entirely separate part of the deposits.
• Tonnage of Reserves 30,000t Evidenced by recent trial holes excavated by Calculated? an experienced brick clay prospector (F Brown & Sons) together with historic evidence from former workings in the area. Not assessed in detail (and cannot be, due to the nature of the deposit). The proposal notes that the presence of clay suitable for use in brickmaking can be localised, which will mean that some of the clay within the site will be suitable for brick making, whilst some of it will not. This is usual. Approximate gross reserve estimated at 15,000 m3 (equivalent to circa 30,000 tonnes) over a 10-hectare area of working, within the overall 41-hectare site).
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 189 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Yes Proposal submitted by a planning consultant Assessed by Proposer? who notes that the clay would be worked by or on behalf of HG Matthews – the specialist hand-made brick manufacturer at nearby Bellingdon.
• Economic Viability Allows Yes Proposal acknowledges potential impacts, for Mitigation? notably on replanted ancient woodland, and the need for mitigation. However, the site itself is commercial woodland and restoration would be simple, as part of the commercial forestry regime. The site is within the Chilterns AONB which could be a major constraint, but any impact is mitigated by the very small scale of working and the traditional nature of the industry.
• Deliverability: operator Yes Proposal submitted by a planning consultant willing? who notes that the clay would be worked by or on behalf of HG Matthews – the specialist hand-made brick manufacturer at nearby Bellingdon.
• Deliverability: landowner Yes Original proposal was submitted on behalf of willing? the landowner.
• Other points to note: The revised proposal, which relates to only about 25% of the total resource and 25% of the total site area would be extracted over a period of 5 years, with an output rate of approximately 6,000tpa.
Adequacy of Supporting Information is adequate to support the proposed allocation. Information
Suitability for Yes consideration as a Specific Site allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The site is not located within an Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Very High The site is located within Roundhill Wood Ancient Woodland which is also extends beyond the site.
Aquifers High The Environment Agency has confirmed that this site is located on a Principal aquifer.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 190 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The site includes an area of deciduous woodland and is adjacent to additional areas of deciduous woodland.
BMV land Medium The site is wholly located within Grade 2 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The site is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High The site contains a small water body. bodies
Flood risk Positive The site is not located within Flood Zones 2-3b. The proposed use may include a dewatering pond, which has the potential to hold excess water in times of heavy rain. However, this is uncertain and will not be known until the planning application stage.
Geodiversity Low The site is not located near to a Local Geological Site or a national site of geological interest (SSSI).
Green Belt Low The site is located within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery may have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The entirety of the site is located within Source Protection Zone 3.
Heritage designations Low The site does not contain nor is located within close proximity to any heritage designations.
International and national Low The site is not located within 250m of any ecological designations international or national ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The site is not in control of the industry.
Landscape designations Very High The site is entirely located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Local Nature Reserves and High The site is located entirely within the Roundhill Local Wildlife Sites Wood Local Wildlife Site.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 191 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Proximity of allocated Low The site is not located within close proximity to residential or built development an existing settlement nor is it located within or in close proximity to a site allocation within the Dacorum District Core Strategy 2013 or Dacorum District Draft Site Allocations DPD 2016.
Recreation High The site does not contain any PRoW, although two footpaths run alongside the northeast and northwest of the site.
Restoration Low Once mineral extraction has finished onsite the land will be restored to indigenous woodland and commercial forestry.
Sensitive land uses High The site is located immediately adjacent to a limited number properties located on the opposite side of Cholesbury Road.
Sustainable transport High The site is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and High The site is not located within or in close pollution to the environment proximity to an Air Quality Management Area, (dust, air, water) and is not located within close proximity to the strategic road network.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this site option identifies significant negative effects (incorporating HRA findings) against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 3.1 (landscape) and 8.4 (agricultural land). In addition, minor negative effects are identified against SA objectives 2.1 (historic environment), 4.1 (water quality), 7.1 (recycling),9.1 (health and well being) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The site is considered to have an overall moderate sensitivity to mineral extraction due to the unified rural character of the area and its position in the AONB. Mineral extraction is likely to degrade valued features, such as the ancient woodland contained within the site. Furthermore, mineral extraction will affect people using the network of local footpaths that cross the site and a limited number of residential properties on the site boundary which would have open views to the site. Impacts on residents could be mitigated by limiting the extent of the workings at any one time and retaining tree cover around the site boundary for the life of the extraction to prevent views into the site.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The site is considered to require further information/assessments to overcome some highways
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 192 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
concerns. It is proposed that the clay would be worked on a campaign basis which could amount to 28 days within a single year. The site promoter estimates that this would result in traffic volumes of approximately 22 two-way movements per day. However, further information in the form of a Transport Assessment would be required to justify this volume of vehicle movements. Additionally, further information is required on the times these vehicle movements would take place. The site promoter states that there is an existing access through double gates via Cholesbury Road. No information has been provided on the dimensions or visibility of the existing gates. As part of any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility. It is understood that vehicle movements would likely remain in the local area. However, further information on the proposed routing of HGV movements would be required to determine the potential impact on the network. The site promoter states that there are a number of public footways which cross the wider site. Therefore, HCC Public Right of Way Team would need to be consulted.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 193 March 2017 Preferred Area 1 Proforma
Preferred Area Information
Description: Land close to the existing Hatfield Quarry
Area: 68 ha
Central Grid Ref.: 216314 532297
District: St Albans District & Welwyn Hatfield District
Mineral to extract: Sand and Gravel
Planning History: The site has no relevant planning history.
Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The area is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The area does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The area has not previously been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes Most of the area falls within Resource Block A of IMAU Report 67, whilst the western edge falls within Resource Block C of IMAU Report 71 (effectively a continuation of the same resource).
This is confirmed by the digital BGS resource map which shows virtually the whole of the
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 194 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
area to be within an area of ‘concealed glacio- fluvial deposits’, overlain in one area (along a former watercourse) by ‘sub-alluvial river terrace deposits’. The BGS superficial geology map indicates the main, lower resource to be part of the pre- glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, overlain (‘concealed’) in this area by glacial till.
• Tonnage of Reserves N/A This level of detail is not possible for a Calculated? Preferred Area allocation, although the southern half of the area coincides with the Specific Site proposal for Hatfield Aerodrome (MLPC006), which has an estimated reserve of 8mt. A single IMAU borehole within the remaining northern part if the site indicates at least 6.7m of sand & gravel beneath an overburden of 5.4m. The land immediately to the north, in a continuation of the same deposit, has also been put forward as a Specific Site (MLPC008), with an estimated reserve of more than half a million tonnes (within a much smaller area).
• Economic Viability Probably Yes Given that the southern part of the area, and land directly to the north, have both been put forward as Specific Sites, with demonstrable economic viability, and that numerous other sites within this general area (and in the same geological deposit) have previously been successfully worked, there is every reason to suppose that the whole of this site will be economically viable.
• Deliverability Probably Unless there is landowner resistance or other planning proposals/allocations. It has been noted there is a plume of bromate coincident with this Preferred Area with a concentration of 750 µg/l to more than 1000 µg/l in a substantial part of the area. This may impact on the deliverability of mineral resource in this area and would need to be fully addressed.
• Other points to note:
Suitability for Yes (subject to any HCC information on deliverability). consideration as a Preferred Area allocation, on resource grounds
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 195 March 2017 Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Medium The Preferred Area is located within the Luton Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Low There is not any ancient woodland within 500m of the Preferred Area.
Aquifers Medium This Preferred Area is located within an undifferentiated Secondary Aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The Preferred Area is partly within an area identified as having no main habitat but additional BAP habitats present.
BMV land Medium The northern part of this Preferred Area is partially located within an area of Grade 2 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Low The Preferred Area is not located within 250m of any existing mineral sites.
Ecological status of water High There are a number of water bodies adjacent bodies to the Preferred Area. The Ellen Brook runs through the eastern part of the Preferred Area. The River Nast also runs in a culvert through the Preferred Area.
Flood risk Low The Preferred Area is located entirely in Flood Zone 1.
Geodiversity Low The Preferred Area is not within proximity of any geological conservation sites.
Green Belt Low The Preferred Area is located entirely within the Green Belt and it is considered that development of the site for mineral extraction will not have an unacceptable impact on the openness of the Green Belt or conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. However, the use and location of mineral plant/machinery could have an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt. This is uncertain as a detailed design of the site will not be known until the planning application stage.
Groundwater vulnerability Medium The Preferred Area is located partially within SPZ 3 and partially within SPZ2. The central area of the site is not located within an SPZ.
There is a plume of bromate coincident with this Preferred Area with a concentration of 750 µg/l to more than 1000 µg/l in a substantial part of the area. The implications of mineral extraction on groundwater contamination in
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 196 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
this area remain uncertain.
Heritage designations Medium Astwick Manor is a Grade II listed building, which lies adjacent to the northwest of the Preferred Area. The Preferred Area is also a possible area of archaeological interest.
International and national Low The Preferred Area is not located in close ecological designations proximity to any national or international ecological designations.
Land ownership Medium The area is not in control of the industry; however, the landowner is working with a mineral operator in respect of the southern area (MLPCS006).
Landscape designations Low The Preferred Area is not within or adjacent to any landscape designations.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium The Preferred Area is located immediately Local Wildlife Sites adjacent to Home Covert and Round Wood, which has been identified as a Local Wildlife Site.
Proximity of allocated Medium The Preferred Area is located in close proximity residential or built development to Land at North West Hatfield (SDS5 / Hat1), which is allocated in the emerging Welwyn Hatfield Draft Local Plan Proposed Submission (August 2016) document.
Recreation High The Preferred Area is part of Ellenbrook Fields, which is an area of recreational green space with permissive footpaths suitable for walkers and cyclists.
Restoration Low The 2002-2016 Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Review suggests that restoration should be consistent with the Hatfield Aerodrome Supplementary Planning Guidance and planning permission ref S6/1999/1064/OP for the BAe site as a whole to deliver the proposed Country Park. It also suggests that there is potential for restoration to include extensive new woodland and amenity use.
Sensitive land uses Medium The Preferred Area is within close proximity to existing residential development in Hatfield, although it is largely separated from these dwellings by a series of water bodies in Ellenbrook Park.
Sustainable transport High The Preferred Area is not located within close proximity to the rail network or navigable
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 197 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Low The Preferred Area is located immediately pollution to the environment adjacent to the strategic road network (A1057) (dust, air, water) but is not located within or in close proximity to an Air Quality Management Area.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this Preferred Area identifies significant negative (incorporating HRA findings) effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Minor negative effects were identified against SA objectives 2.1 (historic environment), 7.1 (recycling), 8.4 (agricultural land), 9.1 (health and wellbeing) and 9.4 (aerodrome safety). Positive or neutral effects were recorded against all other SA objectives, with the exception of SA objective 5.2 (energy efficiency), to which effects were uncertain. Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
The area is considered to have an overall low-moderate sensitivity due to its former industrial use. The area is flat, largely screened by boundary vegetation and post operation restoration could improve the existing landscape character. The boundary vegetation screens views from the small number of residential properties in the vicinity of the site. There are a small number of locations with more open or filtered views of the area; however, impacts can be fully mitigated by additional screening without an adverse impact on visual amenity.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
This area is considered to require further information/assessment to overcome some highways concerns.
The area could be an extension of a site locally known as Hatfield Aerodrome (planning application reference: PL/0755/16). HCC Highways recently commented on this planning application and whilst no objection was raised, concerns were raised. These concerns were overcome by limiting the number of vehicle movements associated with the site. Any extension is likely to raise further concerns.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the access arrangements; proposed trip generation; impacts and cumulative impact on Hatfield Road / Ellenbrook Junction and Hatfield Road/Comet Way junction; Public Rights of Way; the safety of all mode users along Hatfield Road; and a broader assessment of the collision data to take into account the proposed route for HGV movements.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 198 March 2017 Preferred Area 2 Proforma
Site Information
Description: Land to the north of the existing Rickneys Quarry
Area: 61 ha
Central Grid Ref.: 216260 532275
District: East Hertfordshire District
Mineral to extract: Sand and Gravel
Planning History: The preferred area has been subject to a number of applications (3/1653-95, 3/0959-90 and 3/0711-88) all of which were withdrawn. A smaller part of the preferred area has been subject to an application 3/2077-13 (varying 3/0629-06) which has a resolution to grant.
Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The area is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The area does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas No The area has not been previously worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? Yes All but a very small part of the area falls within Resource Block B of IMAU Report 112. This is confirmed by the digital BGS Resource Map which identifies the resource as ‘glacio fluvial
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 199 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
deposits’. The BGS superficial geology map shows the deposits to be part of the pre-glacial Kesgrave Catchment Subgroup, overlain in part of the northern area by glacial till. The proposed allocation comprises two separate parcels of land, to the north and south of the existing Rickneys Quarry, where the same resources have been partially worked. The northern area has been subject to previous planning applications for mineral extraction dating from 1988 to 1995, all of which were withdrawn.
• Tonnage of Reserves N/A This level of detail is not possible for a Calculated? Preferred Area allocation, although the southern part of the area coincides with the Specific Site proposal (Land at Ware Park - MLPC003), which has an estimated reserve of 2.6mt. Three IMAU boreholes close to the western, northern and eastern boundaries of the larger, northern part if the site indicate between 8.9 and 12.4m of sand & gravel beneath an overburden of between 0.3 and 3.8m, suggesting a comparable depth of resource over a larger surface area.
• Economic Viability Probably Yes Given that the southern part of the area has been put forward as Specific Site, with demonstrable economic viability, and that the land in between the two parts of the allocations is successfully being worked, there is every reason to suppose that the whole of this site will be economically viable.
• Deliverability Probably Unless there is landowner resistance or other planning proposals/allocations.
• Other points to note:
Suitability for Yes (subject to any HCC information on deliverability). consideration as a Preferred Area allocation, on resource grounds
Sieve 3
Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zones Low The Preferred Area is not located within an
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 200 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Airport Safeguarding Zone.
Ancient Woodland Very High There are two areas of replanted ancient woodland within the Preferred Area and there are further areas of ancient woodland adjacent to the area.
Aquifers Medium This Preferred Area is located partly within a Secondary A Aquifer and partly within an undifferentiated Secondary Aquifer.
BAP Priority Species or Habitats Medium The Preferred Area contains an area of deciduous woodland, which is a BAP priority habitat.
BMV land Medium This Preferred Area consists entirely of Grade 3 agricultural land.
Cumulative effects Medium The Preferred Area is adjacent to Rickneys, Chapmore End, which has planning permission for sand and gravel extraction (extension of existing quarry), although the site has not been worked. There are some dwellings in proximity of the site, particularly at Chapmore End.
Ecological status of water Low There are no watercourses within proximity to bodies the Preferred Area.
Flood risk Low The Preferred Area lies entirely within Flood Zone 1.
Geodiversity Low This Preferred Area is not within or adjacent to any geodiversity conservation sites.
Green Belt Low The Preferred Area lies entirely within the Green Belt but minerals working is unlikely to conflict with the purposes of Green Belt designation.
Groundwater vulnerability High The southern part of this Preferred Area is located within SPZ 1 and there are also substantial areas of SPZ 2 within the area.
Heritage designations Medium Whilst there are three Grade II listed buildings in Chapmore End, none of these are within or immediately adjacent to the Preferred Area. There is a possible area of archaeological interest within this Preferred Area.
International and national Low This Preferred Area is not within close ecological designations proximity to national or international ecological designations.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 201 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
Land ownership Medium The Preferred Area is within multiple ownership with part of the land subject to existing mineral rights.
Landscape designations Low This Preferred Area is not within or adjacent to any landscape designations.
Local Nature Reserves and Medium Upper Stonyhills Wood and Flowersash Wood Local Wildlife Sites Key Wildlife Sites lie partially within the Preferred Area. In addition, Lower Stonyhills Wood and Bardon Clumps Key Wildlife Sites lie adjacent to the Preferred Area.
Proximity of allocated Low There are no sites for planned built residential or built development development within proximity of this Preferred Area. Although it should be noted that the consultation on the East Herts pre-submission version of the Local Plan took place between November and December 2016. This version of the Plan includes Draft Policy Hert4 – a preferred residential development in close proximity MLPCS003.
Recreation High Several public rights of way cross this Preferred Area, including Bengeo Rural 014, Bengeo Rural 012, Bengeo Rural 022, Bengeo Rural 002 and Bengeo Rural 009.
Restoration Low The 2002-2016 Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Review suggests that proposals will need to demonstrate that there is a sufficient balance of material to achieve proposed restoration.
Sensitive land uses Medium The Preferred Area is in proximity to dwellings at Chapmore End, Dimmings, Stonyhill and the former Rickneys Farmhouse.
Sustainable transport High This Preferred Area is distant from the rail network and the navigable waterway network.
Sustainable transport and Medium The Preferred Area is within proximity of the pollution to the environment strategic road network. There is an AQMA in (dust, air, water) the centre of Hertford, but it is uncertain whether vehicles from minerals workings in the Preferred Area would use this route.
Summary of Sustainability Appraisal
Summary of SA Findings The SA of this Preferred Area identifies significant negative (incorporating HRA findings) effects against SA objectives 1.1 (biodiversity protection), 1.3 (biodiversity air pollution effects), 2.1 (historic environment), 4.1 (water quality) and 9.2 (recreation loss). Minor negative
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 202 March 2017 Criterion Score Justification (Impact)
effects were identified against SA objectives 7.1 (recycling), 8.4 (agricultural land) and 9.1 (health and wellbeing). Positive or neutral effects were recorded against all other SA objectives, with the exception of SA objective 5.2 (energy efficiency), to which effects were uncertain. Overall, this assessment is broadly consistent with the site selection study assessment summarised above.
Summary of Landscape and Visual Sensitivity Comments
Overall this site is considered to have a moderate sensitivity. Although landscape is gently undulating and the site is largely enclosed, the openness to the east could result in an adverse impact on the unified rural character of the wider river valley. Additionally, mineral workings could result in the loss of valuable landscape features including hedgerows and Ancient Woodland. Impacts could be partially mitigated by further screening and extraction operations set back from the ancient woodland. Views from properties and Rights of Way tend to be screened by hedgerows, tree groups and woodland, and could be mitigated through further planting.
Summary of HCC Highways Comments Score:
The area would be accessed via adjoining land at Rickney’s Quarry. Further information/assessments is required to overcome some highways concerns. At this high level HCC has no reason to object to the site. However, further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the existing operation at Rickney’s Quarry, proposed trip generation and the impact this will have on local junctions especially the A602; a broader assessment of the collision data to take into account the proposed route for HGV movements; the access arrangement and suitability for increasing HGV movements in this location; and detailed information on the impact the proposals will have on the footpaths surrounding the site.
It should also be noted that there are additional proposals for mineral extraction for the surrounding land. Therefore, any further assessment will need to consider the cumulative impact of the proposals on the network.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 203 March 2017 Preferred Area 3 Proforma
Site Information
Description: Land to the south-east of the existing Tyttenhanger Quarry
Area: 89 ha
Central Grid Ref.: 203646 519576
District: Hertsmere District
Mineral to extract: Sand and Gravel
Planning History: The preferred area has been subject to two planning applications. 0/1353-06 for the eastern extension of existing quarry south of Coursers Road and progressive restoration using inert fill material. 0/0262-12 for the construction and operation of an Anaerobic Digestion facility.
Sieve 1
Constraint Entirely or partly Justification located within the constraint (Yes/No)
Urban areas No The area is not located within an existing urban area.
Sites with planning No The area does not have planning permission for other permission for an incompatible use development with a site area greater than 5ha.
Previously worked areas Yes The area has been worked.
Proceed to Sieve 2 Yes
Justification See above.
Sieve 2
Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Within Resource Area? No The resource has been extracted by previous workings.
• Tonnage of Reserves Nil See above. Calculated?
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 204 March 2017 Criterion Yes/No Justification
• Economic Viability Nil See above.
• Deliverability Nil See above.
• Other points to note:
Suitability for No- the area comprises land to the south-east of the existing consideration as a Tyttenhanger Quarry, almost all of which has now been Preferred Area allocation, worked, as extensions to that site. It should now be removed on resource grounds as a Preferred Area.
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 205 March 2017 Appendix 2 Hertfordshire Highways Department assessment of site options
Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan Site Selection Report 206 March 2017
Mineral Local Plan Call for Sites Highways Review
This background paper has been prepared in order to provide the details of a high level highway review on sites put forward through the call for sites for the Minerals Local Plan review.
This is not a detailed assessment of the potential implications on the highway network as this would be more appropriate at the planning application stage, where a specific site can be assessed in detail and highway improvements suggested if necessary.
General highways comments have been written for each of the 19 sites, and a traffic light ranking of red, amber, green and grey (for sites lacking information) has been used to determine the potential impact on the local highway network using the following grading set out in the table below:
Proposed sites that have no fundamental highway objection in Green principle. Mitigation measures identified in a site specific Transport Assessment may still be required though. Proposed sites where further information/assessments is Amber required to overcome some highways concerns. A solution may be possible through mitigation measures set out in a site specific Transport Assessment that accompanies a planning application. Proposed sites where significant concerns are identified, which Red are likely to attract highway objections. Further detailed analysis and suggested mitigation measures will need to accompany a planning application, in addition to a site specific Transport Assessment. Not able to be assessed due to a lack of information. Grey
The transportation of minerals may initially involve the use of internal haul roads. However, once processed, the extracted minerals would require onward distribution onto the highway network. This may result in highway implications which would need to be investigated further as part of a planning application.
The highway impact of minerals development can be magnified if there are a number of permissions granted for mineral development within close proximity, or if permission to extract is extended, resulting in many years of mining activity in one location. Mitigating measures might include such measures as the phasing of extraction operations so that one site is completed before a second commences, a restriction on the number of HGV movements or the timetabling of such movements, undertaking pre-extraction landscaping works to reduce cumulative visual impacts and addressing needed junction improvements. Where cumulative impacts have not been, or are unable to be satisfactorily addressed, the Highway Authority could have grounds to refuse permission for that development.
It should be noted that this document is not a substitute for a full Transport Assessment that is required for sites that are subsequently allocated in the Minerals Local Plan. All planning applications should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment, as set out in the Chapter 7 of Section 1 of the Hertfordshire County Council Highway Design Guide, Roads in Hertfordshire. In developments on sensitive locations where there is a significant highway safety/capacity concern and the potential trip generation is below the
1
threshold for a Transport Assessment, the highway authority may ask for a detailed analysis in support of an application.
For any new access or significant alterations to an existing access, a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit must be carried out. Also, an access may be refused due to poor design/visibility or inadequate capacity. Therefore, it is difficult to provide specific comments on a sites suitability without access details and safety audit reports.
2
Site Site Name Highway Authority Assessment Traffic Light Number 1 Cromer Hyde The suggested site abuts Marford Road (B653) to the north and Green Lanes to the east. Red Farm Marford Road is a Classified Road B Secondary Distributor.
Green Lanes is an unnumbered Classified Road – C, L2 Local Access road.
Significant concerns have been identified for this site which are likely to attract highway objections.
No information has been provided on the proposed access arrangements for the site.
Over the last 5 years there have been a total of 12 collisions resulting in slight injuries on Marford Road within direct proximity of the site. Five of these collisions occurred at the intersection of Marford Road and Green Lanes. This indicates that there may be existing safety issues at this junction. There have been 2 collisions resulting in slight injuries and 2 collisions resulting in serious injuries on Green Lanes directly abutting the site.
There is a school and a church located to the east of the site off Lemsford Village. More information on the proposed routing of HGV vehicles is required to assess whether there will be any safety implications for these existing land uses.
In order to assess this site further HCC highways would require a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV vehicles).
If this site were to be taken forward, it would also need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of site 8 and site 9 to assess the impact on the network, this will also need to consider any phasing of extraction operations. Additionally, it should be noted that the site abuts another site which has been highlighted as a proposed housing
3
allocation site for 2031 through the Welwyn Hatfield Proposed Development Local Plan. However, the cumulative impact of this can only be assessed when more information on the phasing of extraction is provided.
2 Land at The site is located on agricultural land. The Colney Fields Shopping Park is located north Red Salisbury Hall of the M25.
Significant concerns have been identified for this site which are likely to attract highway objections.
The Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the A1087/B556 junction as having existing capacity problems.
It is suggested by the site promoter that mineral HGV transportation movements from the propsed site to the Tyttenhanger processing plant site would use the B556 and the A414.
This would mean that all HGV movements would be directed through the A1087/B556 roundabout. This roundabout also serves as a main access point for vehicles travelling to the Colney Fields Shopping Park. Therefore, the cumulative impact of the vehicles associated with the site with the vehicles generated by the Colney Fields Shopping Park would need to be assessed to determine whether this routing arrangement is feasible.
In order to assess this site further HCC highways would require a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements).
Additionally, it should be noted that this site is within close proximity of the proposed Radlett Rail Freight Interchange and should therefore should be considered in regards cumulative impacts and to the changes of the network associated with the Radlett Rail Freight Interchange.
4
3 Land at Ware The site promoter suggests access directly onto Wadesmill Road with all traffic to and Amber Park from the North via the A602- majority of output would be via the A10/A602 junction. Wadesmill Road is a numbered classified secondary distributor road with a speed limit of 60mph and a 7.5 tonne weight limit.
The site promoter has also submitted an application (ref: PL0776/16) which has received comments from HCC highways. During this correspondence HCC highways stated that before HCC highways can support the application the following further information is required: • The applicant will need to determine what level of impact the site will have on the A602 junction and undertake further discussions with HCC highways to determine what level of mitigation would be deemed necessary. • The applicant will need to provide a broader assessment of the collision data to take into account the proposed route for HGV movements; • The applicant will need to provide additional information on the proposed access arrangement in relation to the Rickney’s Quarry site access; • The applicant will need to provide additional information on the impact the site will have on Footpath 1 route and consult further with the HCC Public Right of Ways Team; • The applicant will need to provide additional information on the proposed permissive paths along the eastern field edge and along the farm track in order for HCC to assess whether the proposed path is acceptable.
As such, HCC highways will assess the site further once the additional information has been submitted by the applicant.
4 Land at The proposed site is located on agricultural land. The A412 runs to the east of the site Green Pynesfield and Tilehouse Lane borders the site to the North and West. The site is roughly 17ha of which 9ha would be for the extraction of minerals. The surrounding area is open Green Belt land with little other development in the area.
5
Access to the site is from Tilehouse Lane which has a junction access to A412. Tilehouse Lane is a rural access lane with narrow width and hedges either side. The A412 is known locally as the North Orbital Road which forms part of the local strategic highway network and connects with M40 to the South and M25 (junction 17) to the north. A412 is of average 9m wide with grass verges wither side with a speed limit of 50 mph near the site
HCC highways commented on the planning application for this site under reference 8/1254-15. During this consultation HCC highways did not wish to object subject to conditions regarding vehicle restrictions, the impact of construction vehicles onto the local area and also a routing agreement.
5 Nashes and The site is proposed for the extraction of sand and gravel within the next 1 to 5 years. Red Fairfolds Farm The access is proposed either direct to House Lane or via the adjacent Hatfield Quarry. House Lane is a local distributor road subject to a 30mph speed limit and a weight restriction of 7.5 tonnes. House Lane is narrow road and not suitable for HGV movements and therefore the site poses significant highways concerns.
More information is required for HCC highways to assess the site including a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part of any application, information on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility. 6 Hatfield This site is currently an allocated site in the 2007 Minerals Local Plan. Amber Aerodrome The applicant submitted a planning application (reference: PL\0755\16) which is currently being reviewed by HCC Highways.
6
The site promoter has stated that most of HGV traffic would route to the east towards the A1(M).
The site promoter states access onto the A1057. A preliminary design has been prepared to accompany the current planning application. However, it is understood that a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) is being undertaken. HCC highways will provide further comment on the feasibility of the site once the Stage 1 RSA has been submitted and reviewed.
7 Barwick Farm The site is proposed for the extraction is for sand, gravel, and other minerals within the Grey next 1 to 5 years.
The site is located within agricultural land.
No information has been provided on proposed access points or HGV routing. Due to a lack of information the site cannot be assessed. However, it should be noted that the cumulative impacts of the site may need to be reviewed in relation to Site 15 (Plashes Farm) in order to assess the impact on the network.
Further detailed analysis will need to be provided in a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV vehicles). Additionally, information on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
8 Hatfield Furze The Hatfield Furze Field site is proposed as an extension to the existing Hatfield Quarry. Amber Field There is an existing access off Oaklands Lane.
It is proposed that the existing conveyor system would be used under Coopers Green Lane to transport sand and gravel to the existing plant site located off Oaklands Lane. However, no further information has been provided on the onwards distribution of minerals.
7
Information on the proposed trip generation and trip distribution is required so that HCC highways can assess what impact the additional HGV movements would have on the network. Also, it should be noted that there are additional proposed sites for mineral extraction for the surrounding land (Site 1, Site 5, Site 6 and Site 9). Therefore, any further assessment would need to consider the cumulative impact of these sites on the network.
Additionally, it should be noted that the proposal overlaps with another site which has been highlighted as a proposed Housing Allocation Site for 2031 through the Welwyn Hatfield Proposed Local Plan. However, the cumulative impact of this can only be assessed when more information on the timing of development in available.
9 Land adjoining The site is proposed as an extension to the existing Hatfield Quarry. Amber Coopers Green Lane It is suggested that material would continue to be processed at the established processing plant area at Hatfield quarry. Sand and Gravel would be transported to the existing plant site via conveyer. The existing access off Oaklands Lane would continue to export all sand and gravel via HGV.
It is proposed that operations would be likely to begin in the next 1 to 5 years (succeeding the Hatfield Furze Field site). As stated previously, information on the proposed trip generation is required so that HCC highways can assess what impact the additional HGV movements will have on the network. As stated above it should be noted that there are additional sites for mineral extraction for the surrounding land (Site 1, Site 5, Site 6 and Site 8). Therefore, any further assessment will need to consider the cumulative impact of the sites on the network. Further information is required on the phasing of extraction operations in order to assess this.
Public Right of Ways may need to be diverted. As such, the HCC’s Public Right of Ways Team would also need to be consulted.
8
Additionally, the site has been highlighted as a proposed Housing Allocation Site for 2031.
10 The Briggens The site is currently in agricultural use and forms part of The Briggens Estate situated Red Estate immediately to the north of the A414 and west of Harlow. The Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights this junction (A414/B181) as having existing capacity problems. The site promoter sets out that access is anticipated to be taken via Roydon Road (B181) with HGV movement directed to the A414. This site, therefore, poses significant highways concerns.
Additionally, discussions with HCC Highways Network Management would be required regarding the HGV route and weight restrictions on the network.
11 Water Hall The proposed rate of extraction is 170,000 tonnes per year and duration of operation until Amber Farm Fields completion 5.5 years. Area The Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site requires further investigation.
It is stated that minerals can be carried over private land directly to the processing plant at Water Hall.
It should be noted that the material extracted from the above sites will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
The site would need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 12, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19 to assess the impact on the B158. In order to assess the
9
cumulative impacts further information on phasing and timing of the mineral extraction would be required.
12 Waterhall It is proposed that the rate of extraction would be 150,000 tonnes per year and the duration Amber Broad Green of operation until completion 3 years.
It is proposed that mineral would be carried over private land, through Bunkers Hill Quarry, across Lower Hatfield Road directly to the processing plant at Water Hall.
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
It should be noted that the material extracted from the above sites will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. In order to assess the cumulative impacts further information on phasing and timing of the mineral extraction would be required.
13 Harry’s Field The proposed site is for the extraction of brick and clay. The site is within agricultural land. Amber Bovingdon Brickworks To the south east of the site there is another site which has been subject to a planning application (Ref: 4/2819-15). HCC highways provided comments on this application and did not wish to object subject to suitable conditions.
10
It is proposed that the Harry’s Field site would use the same access route that would be constructed under the planning consent of 4/2819-15. Therefore, the access arrangement would be subject to the conditions outlined in the Decision Notice for 4/2819-15.
Additionally, as part of this site the site promoter would need to provide additional information on the number of HGV movements the site will generate in order to determine what level of impact the additional HGV movements will have on the network and whether the intensification of the proposed access is acceptable. 14 Bunkers Hill The proposed site is within existing greenfield agricultural land. The proposed site area is Amber South adjacent an existing processing plant area at Water Hall Quarry which is located on Lower Hatfield Road.
Lower Hatfield Road is a Classified B, Secondary Distributor.
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
It is stated that the minerals would be carried over private land, through Bunkers Hill Quarry, across Lower Hatfield Road directly to the processing plant. This would result in an increase of HGV vehicles crossing Lower Hatfield Road which could lead to congestion and safety issues along this route. Further information is required with regards to the level of intensification the site would create at this access and also information on how this would be managed with the existing services.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
11
The proposed access road would be via a 50m concrete access road. The internal haul road would be surfaced with gravel. Wheel washing facilities, weighbridge and offices will be provided.
There is existing speed reduction signage along Lower Hatfield Road.
It should be noted that the material extracted from this site will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. However, the cumulative impact of this can only be assessed when more information on the phasing of extraction is available.
15 Plashes Farm Proposed access onto Gore Lane with the HGV movements directed to the A10. Amber
It is proposed that the site access would consist of a concrete access road with the internal haul road surfaced with gravel.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
Discussions with HCC highways would be required to determine the level of improvements would be required/appropriate for Gore Lane.
It should be noted that the cumulative impacts of the site may need to be reviewed in relation to Site 7 (Barwick Farm) in order to assess the cumulative impact on the network.
12
16 Howe Green It is proposed that the rate of extraction would be 150,000 tonnes per year and duration of Grey operation until completion 6.5 years.
No details of access arrangements have been provided. If access is proposed to be from Robins Nest Hill, it is anticipated that improvements will be required to accommodate the proposal.
It should be noted that the material extracted from this site will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 12, 14, 17, 18 and 19 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. In order to assess the cumulative impacts further information on phasing and timing of the mineral extraction would be required.
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
17 Robins Nest The proposed rate of extraction is 150,000 tonnes per year. Duration of operation until Amber Hill completion 6.5 years.
13
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
Robins Nest Hill has constraints which could be overcome by modest highway improvements. Thereafter transport either through restored Pollards Wood area or by Lower Hatfield Road to Water Hall processing area.
It should be noted that the material extracted from this site will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 19 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. However, the cumulative impact of this can only be assessed when more information on the phasing of extraction is available. 18 Southfield It is stated that the rate of extraction would be 150,000 tonnes per year and the duration of Amber Wood House operation until completion 3.3 years.
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
Access would be directly over company land to Water Hall processing area. Additionally, it should be noted that the material extracted from this site will be processed at Water Hall.
14
This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, and 19 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. However, the cumulative impact of this can only be assessed when more information on the phasing arrangements of the extraction is available.
19 Pipers End It is stated that the rate of extraction would be 150,000 tonnes per year and the duration of Amber operation until completion 9.3 years.
It is proposed that the access would be directly over company land to Water Hall processing area.
It should be noted that the Countywide strategic highway model, COMET, highlights the B158/B1455 junction as having existing capacity problems. Therefore, the impact of this site could contribute towards a cumulative impact which requires further investigation.
It should be noted that the material extracted from this site will be processed at Water Hall. This being the case the amount of traffic generated by Water Hall will need to be carefully assessed to ensure that the level of traffic does not exceed that accepted in the past.
Further information is required in the form of a Transport Assessment detailing the proposed trip generation and the impact of the network (including the proposed routing of HGV movements). Additionally, as part any application, details on the proposed access arrangement will be required so that HCC can assess its feasibility.
15
The site will need to be assessed in relation to the potential cumulative impact of sites 11, 12, 14, 16, 17and 18 to assess the cumulative impact on the B158. In order to assess the cumulative impacts further information on phasing and timing of the mineral extraction would be required.
16
HCC Highways Comments on the Preferred Areas for the adopted Minerals Local Plan 2007
Preferred Land at This preferred area lies to the west of Hatfield and access is anticipated to be Grey Area Former British taken from the A1057 Hatfield Road. Traffic will be directed eastbound to A1001. No.1 Aerospace It is noted that this site is highlighted within the Adopted Minerals Local Plan (2007) as part of the preferred area.
It appears that this site could be an extension of a site locally known as Hatfield Aerodrome (planning application reference: PL/0755/16). HCC Highways recently commented on this planning application and whilst raise no objection subject to conditions a number of concerns were raised. These concerns were overcome by limiting the number of vehicle movements associated with the site. Therefore any extension is likely to raise further concerns.
Other than that set out above no information has been provided to support the proposals. Further information will ultimately be required to demonstrate that the proposals are feasible. Further detailed analysis will be required to be provided within a Transport Assessment and will need to include (but not limited to):
Details of the access arrangements, it is noted that it proposed access will be taken from the A1057 Hatfield Road. Confirmation as to whether this will be via the access for application PL/0755/16 or an additional access will need to be provided. It will also need to be demonstrated that a safe and suitable access can be provided;
Determine the trip generation associated with the proposals and also the cumulative impact when considering PL/0755/16;
Determine the impact and cumulative impact on Hatfield Road/ Ellenbrook Junction and Hatfield Road/ Comet Way junction;
Details of Public Rights of Way;
Details regarding the safety of all mode users along Hatfield Road; and
A broader assessment of the collision data to take into account the proposed route for HGV movements.
HCC will assess the proposal once the additional information has been submitted by the applicant.
Preferred Land adjoining Access to the adjoining land is proposed via the existing Rickney’s Quarry access Amber Area Rickney’s from Wadesmill Road. It is acknowledged that all traffic will travel to and from the No.2 Quarry North via A602.
Wadesmill Road is a numbered classified secondary distributor road with a 60mph speed limit and a 7.5 tonne weight limit.
It is noted that this site is highlighted within the Adopted Minerals Local Plan (2007) as a preferred area and that the intention for this site would be an extension to the existing Rickney’s Quarry.
No information other than that above has been provided. At this high level HCC has no reason to object to the site. However, further information is required to assess whether the proposal is feasible. Further detailed analysis will need to accompany a planning application in the form a Transport Assessment. The additional information will need to include (but not limited to):
Details of the existing operation at Rickney’s Quarry, (e.g. times of operation, size of vehicles, parking, access arrangements);
Determine the trip generation associated with the proposals and impact this will have on local junctions especially A602. It is advised that early discussions with HCC would be prudent particularly to agree mitigation if required;
A broader assessment of the collision data to take into account the proposed route for HGV movements;
The access arrangement and the suitability for increasing HGV movements in this location;
Detailed information on the impact the proposals will have on the footpaths surrounding the site and consult with the HCC Public Rights of Way Team.
It should also be noted that there are additional proposals for mineral extraction for the surrounding land. Therefore, any further assessment will need to consider the cumulative impact of the proposals on the network.
HCC will assess the proposal further once the additional information has been submitted by the applicant.